LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 

Shelf -^- ^ 



UNITED STATES 01? AMEKICA. 



By the Same Author. 


E 

$o 

I 
. I 


60 
00 

75 
75 


A STUDY OF THE CONSTITUTION OF TH 
METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, . 

EVOLUTION OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES, . 

MANUAL OF METHODIST EPISCOPAL 

CHURCH HISTORY 


INTERROGATORY STUDIES IN BIBLE HIS- 
TORY 





ArMINIANISM in HISTORY; 



The Revolt from Predestinationism. 



BY 

GEO. L. CURTISS, M. D., D. D., 

Professor of Historical Theology in the School of Theology 
of DePauw University. 



^ %^-j^l "-2. 



I 



CINCINNATI: CRANSTON & CURTS. 
NEW YORK : HUNT & EATON. 

1894. 



■^2 






COPYRIGHT 
BY CRANSTON & CURTS. 

1894. 



TtiE Library 
OF Congress 



WASHINGTON 

■ T^ 



PREFACE. 



When it became necessary to give a class in 
Historical Theology a careful view of Arminian- 
ism in its historical as well as doctrinal charac- 
ter, I found material for such a study, but it 
was undigested, ill-arranged, and very unsatis- 
factory. After a careful search I failed to find 
a book on the subject that could be recommended 
to students. A copy of Brandt's " Life of 
James Arminius'^ could not be found, though 
a large dealer advertised at times for a year for 
it. Only recently I ran across it in an old 
French second-band bookstore in Xew Orleans. 
Driven to gather and arrange such material as 
could be obtained, there resulted these chapters 
in the form of lectures, which were delivered to 
the class, discussed, revised, and delivered a sec- 
ond time. After this they were re-written and 
put in the present form, and a third time deliv- 
ered to thoughtful men. 

At the request of those who heard them, they 
are now offered to the public in this form. They 



4 PREFA CE. 

do not profess to be an exhaustive treatment of 
the history of Arminianism, but to make such a 
fair and clear presentation as shall lead young 
Methodists to a knowledge of what Arminian- 
ism is, what it has had to contend with in the 
struggle for existence, why Methodism is Ar- 
minian and not Calvinian, a part of the reason 
why Methodism has had such remarkable moral 
and spiritual victories, and what triumphs there 
are in store for Arminian Methodism as " Chris- 
tianity in earnesf in the years to come? 

GEO. L. CURTISS. 
DePauw University, 1894. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

Page. 

What is Arminianism, 7 



CHAPTER II. 
Arminius as Professor at Leyden, 32 

CHAPTER III. 
Arminiax Leaders, 51 

CHAPTER IV. 
Arminian Writers, 73- 

CHAPTER V. 
Doctrinal Controversies, 93- 

CHAPTER VI. 
Pre-Wesleyan Arminianism in Europe, 118 

CHAPTER VII. 
The Political Home of Arminianism, 13^ 

CHAPTER VIII. 

Arminianism in its Wesleyan Growth, 156- 

CHAPTER IX. 

Scholars of Arminianism, 179 

5 



6 INDEX. 

CHAPTER X. 

Page. 

Arminianism and the Friends, 200 

CHAPTER XI. 

Arminianism and Revivals, 209 

Appendix, 221 

Index, 227 



ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 



Chapter I. 

WHAT IS ARMINIANISM? 

Epochs in History — Discussions of Doctrines and Polity — 
Spread of Predestinationism — Calvinism, Arminianism, 
and Universalism — A Particular Statement of Armin- 
ianism — Original Sin as taught by Arminius — Armin- 
ianism not a New Doctrine as taught by Arminius — 
Augustine and Predestination to Eternal Life — Gott- 
schalk and Foreordination to Damnation — James Armin- 
ius— Birth— Death of his Father — Adopted by ^milius — 
At School at Utrecht — Death of ^milius— Adopted by 
Suellius— At Marburg -Murder of his Mother, Sisters, 
■and Brother at Oudewater — At Eotterdam — Sent to Ley- 
den— A Brilliant Student— Adopted by the Burgomeis- 
ters of Amsterdam — Sent to Geneva — Forms the Ac- 
quaintance of Uytenbogaert— Went to Basle and studied 
for a Time — Went to Padua — Heard Zarabella Visited 
Rome— Called to Amsterdam— Examined by the Classis — 
<:!ommenced Preaching — How Arminius came to adopt 
the Doctrine called by his Name — Koornhert to be re- 
futed — Arminius chosen for the Task— The Examination 
led to his Repudiation of Predestination — Married — 
Public Exposition of Romans— Criticism and Slander — 
His Traducers — His Defense— The Senators decide in 
his Favor. 

The distinct and vigorous promulgation of im- 
portant doctrines of Christianity, and their working 
like leaven among the people, produce epochs in 

7 



8 A R MINI A NISM IN HIS T OR Y. 

history. This is especially true if the doc+rine« 
chance to antagonize some old and favorite doc- 
trine of the Church, or some branch, and runs 
counter to the preconceived notions of any con-, 
siderable number of men. The most remarkable 
discussions that the world has ever heard, and 
which have produced the most marked effects upon 
events in history, both in individuals and in na-. 
tions, are those about Christian doctrine and Church 
government. The best talent, the greatest learn-- 
ing, the highest degree of enthusiasm, and, at thC: 
same time, the most wonderful endurance have been 
brought into the discussions of doctrines and polity 
in whatever age. If there has been mingled in the 
discussions of Christian doctrine any political ques-- 
tion, the results have entirely changed the face of 
history. 

When Arminianism was promulgated in Hol- 
land at the Synod of Dort, Calvinism was the dom-. 
inant doctrine regarding original sin, freedom of 
the will, and God's decrees concerning human sal- 
vation. For a full thousand years it held sway 
over the masses of the people under the name of 
Augustinism, and when some enlightened ecclesias-. 
tics presumed to controvert and deny the truth of 
the dogma, and proceeded to demonstrate its fallacy 
from Scripture and logic, then arose agitations in 
the Reformed Church world of so persistent a char- 
acter as to affect schools, agitate Churches, and, 
sometimes, to involve nations. Such a hold had 



WBA T IS AR MINI A NISM ? \J 

this doctrine of the eternal decrees taken upon 
men that they came to question the right of any- 
one to doubt the truth of the dogmas of Calvinism. 
It had taken hold upon the State, and stamped it- 
self upon the Government of Geneva, dictated its 
<;onstitution, and enacted its laws. Having achieved 
this brilliant success, it reached out to other Swiss 
States or cantons, to do for them as at Geneva. 
It crossed the sea, and took a firm hold upon Scot- 
land, and so fastened itself upon her sturdy minds 
that it held them with the grasp of a giant, from 
which thralldom the Scottish mind has not yet been 
freed. In England, Calvinism asserted itself, and 
demanded the highest place, priding itself upon be- 
ing recognized as the established doctrine regarding 
human salvation. Intrenched in this fortified fast- 
ness for many years, it w^as impossible to advance 
any other claims. From England Calvinism crossed 
the Atlantic, and intrenched itself in the sterile soil 
and among the rugged rocks of New England, and 
refused to admit the preaching of, and belief 
in, the doctrine of Arminianism, until that unique 
pioneer of Xew England Methodism preached a sal- 
vation free to the world of men in Boston Common, 
while standing upon a borrowed table. Look the 
facts over, and see if it is not true that Episcopacy, 
Independency, Congregationalism, and Presbyte- 
rianism were all the professors of and in the posses- 
sion of the hard dogmas of Calvinism. East and 
West, in the Old World and in the New, there was 



10 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

only a slight foothold for the warmer, richer, and 
more soul-encouraging doctrines of Arminianism. 

In the world are three great doctrinal systems, 
regarding human salvation, known by distinctive 
titles ; namely, Calvinism, Arminianism, and Uni- 
versalism. The kernel of each may be stated in a 
few words. 

Calvinism, among other things, says that God in 
Jesus Christ made provision for the salvation of 
those in the human race who were predestinated 
and foreordained from all eternity to be saved in 
heaven, and the remainder are predestinated and 
foreordained from all eternity to eternal damnation 
for the glory of God. 

Arminianism teaches that God in Jesus Christ 
made provision fully for the salvation of all those 
who, by repentance towards God and faith in our 
Lord Jesus Christ, accept the terms, and all who 
do thus accept are eternally saved. All who rebel 
against God, and refuse to accept of Jesus on the 
terms of proffered mercy, sink under Divine wrath, 
and are eternally lost. 

Universalism teaches that God in Christ Jesus 
has made such an abundant and merciful provision 
for human salvation that everybody, irrespective of 
individual moral character, and without repentance 
and faith in a Savior, shall be saved in heaven. 
In this doctrine there is no provision for the pun- 
ishment of sin hereafter. All punishment of sin is 
in this life. Universalism has been driven to such 



WSA T IS A RMINIA NISM ? 1 1 

straits as strangely to equivocate in her statements 
as to how much punishment may be given or re- 
quired in this life, and how much may be given in 
a possible state of post-mortem purgation. There 
seems to be no uniform solid ground upon which 
all believers in the doctrines of Universalism may 
stand. 

According to Calvinism, there is in man a ne- 
cessitated will, which can act only in certain ways. 
The will must act, but it is necessitated to act in a 
certain way. Out of that groove it can not move. 

According to Arminianisn, there is a perfect 
freedom of will regarding man's moral condition 
and powers. Man must make his own choice of 
salvation, or choose to reject. He may will freely 
to use the means provided for his salvation, or he 
may as freely reject. In either case he must abide 
by the results of his free choice. 

According to Universalism, there is no will in 
salvation. Man is in a condition of salvation with- 
out his choice. He is in the stream, and can not 
do otherwise than go with it into heaven. 

A More Particular Statement of Arminianism. 

What is Arminianism ? In the fewest words, it 
is the doctrine that God, by the sacrificial offering 
of his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, has made 
an abundant provision for the salvation of all hu- 
man souls who come unto him in the prescribed 
manner. This provision is universal. Not a soul 



12 A R MINI A NISM IN HIS TORY. 

is left out of the promise. Every soul that wills to 
enter life eternal, by using the means designated 
may enter into life eternal, and not die. All souls 
who go down to hell, go, not because God has fore- 
ordained them to go down to blackness and despair, 
but because they have willed to reject the offers of 
mercy. 

As to original sin, Arminianism teaches that 
man, descending from Adam, has become corrupted 
by Adam's sin, but is not guilty. Adam was both 
guilty and corrupted. No one will be lost in per 
dition because of Adam's transgression, but all are 
in the bondage of corruption because of the sin 
of the federal head. From the crown of the head 
to the sole of the foot there is corruption. This 
involves man's triple nature — body, mind, and 
spirit. This corruption has so affected the race 
that no one can return to God by natural means. 
His virtue is prostrated, his power largely paralyzed, 
his appetite for purity sadly vitiated, his bent to 
sin and folly established. But he may will to reach 
out to proffered redemption by the blood of Jesus 
Christ, and receive such gracious aid from the Holy 
Spirit, by the exercise of faith, as to be restored to 
favor with God and sealed for the kingdom of heaven. 

The system of theology that teaches clearly this 
doctrine is called Arminianism, because that James 
Arminius advocated it strongly against the Calvin- 
istic doctrine in Holland, while his followers advo- 
cated it in the Synod of Dort. 



WHA T IS A RMINIA NISM ? 1 3 

Was this a New Doctrine with Arminius? 

No. "Before the time of Augustine [fourth 
century] the unanimous doctrine of the Church 
Fathers, so far as scientifically developed at all, was 
that the Divine decrees as to the fate of the indi- 
vidual man were conditioned upon their faith and 
obedience, as foreseen in the Divine Mind. Augus- 
tine, in his controversy with Pelagius, with a view 
to enhance the glory of grace, was the first to teach 
unequivocally that the salvation of the elect de- 
pends upon the bare will of God, and that his de- 
cree to save those whom he chooses to save was un- 
conditional." 

It was left for Gottschalk, in the ninth century, 
to supply the second part of the doctrine ; namely, 
that those who are not saved unconditionally are 
foreordained to be damned, or reprobated to be lost. 
Thus stood the doctrine about 1535, when John 
Calvin, either at Geneva or at Strasburg, united 
the foreordination unto eternal life unconditionally 
of Augustine, and the foreordination of the repro- 
bate to hell unconditionally of Gottschalk, and 
sent them out as the center of his system of Sys- 
tematic Theology in the Christian Institutes. The 
doctrine has since that time received the name of 
Calvinism. 

There have been some erroneous statements 
concerning Arminianism, which must have arisen 
from either a willful perversion of the truth or an 
2 



14 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

ignorance of it. Dr. Archibald A. Hodge, in 
Johnson's Encyclopedia, says: "Between these 
[that is, between Pelagianism and Calvinism] comes 
the manifold and elastic system of a compromise 
known as Semi-Pelagianism, and in modern times 
as Arminianism." There never was a time when 
Semi-Pelagianism and Arminianism were synony- 
mous terms. They are now, and always have been, 
quite distinct in their definitions and teaching. To 
attempt to bring Arminianism into contempt by 
linking it with Arianism, Socinianism, or with any 
other kindred notion that is recognized in the Chris- 
tian world as erroneous, is base in the extreme. It 
is true that some of these sects have advocated one 
or two doctrines as held by Arminius ; but that 
does not make them, by any means, Arminians, any 
more than because a few men are criminals, there- 
fore all men are criminals. Arminianism is a sys- 
tem of its own, wholly distinct from Pelagianism, 
Semi-Pelagianism, Arianism, Socinianism, and all 
other isms, and especially from Calvinism. 

When James Arminius taught the system now 
called by his name he was only restoring to the 
world the doctrine as found in the primitive Church. 
Calvinism was not the primitive apostolical doctrine 
or faith. The primitive doctrine universally taught 
that whosoever willed to come to the Father by the 
Son could do so, by the w^ay of Jesus Christ, and 
be eternally saved. Man was made with a will, 
and was free to act in approach to God, or free to 



WHA T IS A RMINIA NISM? 1 5 

refuse and go away into despair and darkness and 
eternal death. James Arminius was the rightful 
restorer of the doctrine as it flowed from the lips 
of the impetuous Peter, the beloved John, the 
sweet-spirited James, the polished Paul, and all the 
apostles and early Fathers of the Church. 

James Armtxius. 

Who was James Arminius, and how did he 
come to advocate this doctrine? With this ques- 
tion arises another of some importance : How did 
the primitive doctrine come to be so long obscured, 
and such antagonistic notions prevail? 

Jacob Hermannson, or, as sometimes called, 
simply Hermann, w^as born in the year 1560 A. D., 
at a town in South Holland called Oude water. 
After he began to be a scholar, his name was Lat- 
inized into Jacobus Arminius, and in the English 
the Jacobus became James. His father's name 
was Hermann Jacobs, and his mother, Angelica, a 
woman of Dort. His father's occupation was that 
of a cutler, holding a respectable position in the 
town. While James was yet an infant his father 
died, leaving a wife and three children. Jacobus 
was taken under the care of a former Romish priest 
by the name of Theodorus ^Emilius. At an early 
age he was sent to school at Utrecht, to w'hich 
place ^milius had removed. The character of 
^milius was good, being now a Reformed clergy- 
man, and quite learned, and from him Arminius 



16 A RMINIA NISM IN JUS TOBY. 

received careful training. Theodorus ^milius was 
"a man of singular erudition, who stood high among 
his fellow-townsmen for the gravity of his manners 
and the purity of his life." When the youth was 
fifteen years of age his foster-father died. At once 
a friend, Rudolph Snellius, a "profound linguist 
and most expert mathematician," took him in charge, 
and in 1575 removed to Marburg for the advan- 
tages of that school. This was the year when the 
Spaniards attacked and sacked Arminius's native 
town of Oudewater, and cruelly murdered hun- 
dreds of innocent people without regard to sex, put 
its garrison to the sword, and hanged its ministers of 
religion. Hearing of this sad event, and fearing 
the worst, Armiriius hurried back to find that his 
mother, brother, and sisters had perished by the 
hands of the wicked soldiers, and with them several 
relatives. Overlooking the blackened ruins of his 
once beautiful home, and saddened by the hard con- 
ditions, and feeling that all ties that bound him 
to this spot had been broken, Arminius walked back 
to Marburg. Few can realize the sadness of that 
hour to this youth, — fatherless, motherless, brother- 
less, sisterless, and homeless, all because of the 
wicked persecutions of the Church of Rome. The 
outlook was anything but bright. Only a myste- 
rious, overruling Providence can now provide. 

For some unexplained reason he went to Rotter- 
dam, possibly because a few remnants of his Oude- 
water friends had escaped there, and waited for 



WHA T IS A RMINIA NISM f 1 7 

something favorable to occur in their native State. 
Peter Bertius was the pastor of a Reformed Church 
at that place. He was a large-hearted and philan- 
thropic man, and as a man of God opened his home 
and received young Arminius into his family. 
Peter Bertius sent young Arminius, with his son 
Peter, to the University of Leyden, which had just 
been founded by William, Prince of Orange. Ar- 
minius was fortunate in his teachers at Leyden. 
Beside Peter Bertius, Sen., was John Taffin, Wal- 
loon minister and counselor of the Prince of 
Orange, Lambert Dan?eus, a master of varied 
erudition, " versed at once in philosophical and 
theological studies," and John Dousa, a poet of no 
mean character. "Arminius," says Brandt, "soon 
made such proficiency that he far outstripped his 
fellow-students. . . . There was scarcely a field 
of study or department of the arts which he did not 
bound over with eager and joyous impulse." Here 
he remained six years. The brilliancy and attain- 
ments of the youth attracted the attention of the 
* ' Directors of the Merchants of the City of Amster- 
dam," a body of wealthy and noble-hearted men of 
strong faith, and concerned in the government of 
the city. It was agreed that they should furnish 
all the money necessary to defray his expenses while 
being educated for the ministry, on conditions which 
he accepted. On accepting this generous offer, Ar- 
minius agreed that "after he had been ordained he 
would not serve in the Church of any other city 



18 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS T OR Y. 

without the permission of the burgomeisters of 
Amsterdam." 

Having accepted the agreement for material 
aid, in 1582 Arminius went to Geneva to study 
theology, and fully prepare himself for the work of 
the Church. Geneva was at that time the center 
of the Keformed Church. The school stood at the 
head, and was justly celebrated all over the Chris- 
tian world. The doctrines clustering around un- 
conditional predestination as taught by John Cal- 
vin, were taught and enforced with the intensest 
rigor, and their form was unchanged by Theodore 
Beza, who, if possible, was a stronger predestina- 
tionist than Calvin. Arminius had a profound ad- 
miration for Beza. "With the utmost gravity of 
manners, this theologian excelled his compeers in 
persuasiveness of address and in promptitude and 
perspicuity of utterance, while his learning and 
attainments in sacred literature were profound and 
extraordinary. With ears intent Arminius drank 
in his words ; with eager assiduity he hung upon 
his lips ; and with intense admiration he listened to 
his exposition of the ninth chapter of Paul's Epistle 
to the Romans." (Brandt, p. 44.) The progress 
made by Arminius Avas great. His mind moved 
and worked strongly and rapidly. He stood among 
the first students at Geneva. 

AVhile at Geneva, he met with a student from 
Holland, and of the university of Utrecht, who 
never Latinized his extravagantly long and hard 



WHA T IS ARMINIANISM? 19 

name, Uytenbogaert, a man of no mean ability and 
culture. Their friendship was life-long, and when 
the time was ripe for it, Uytenbogaert became one 
of ^the stanchest advocates of the doctrines promul- 
gated by Arminius. While at Geneva, Arminius 
began to lecture as well as study. He sharply at- 
tacked the philosophy of Aristotle, giving offense 
to some of the professors by defending Ramus and 
his system of dialectics in opposition to that of the 
old Greek philosopher. Great opposition was raised 
to his remaining at Geneva, and soon he visited 
Basle, and entered the university and began his 
studies. So proficient was Arminius in his lectur- 
ing and studies, that the faculty of theology offered 
to confer on him the Doctor's degree gratis. Strange 
to say, this rising young star among theologians de- 
clined the honor, alleging as a reason that he was 
too young a man to receive such a grave degree. 

In 1588, Arminius returned to Geneva, where 
the storm raised against him had measurably blown 
over, and he remained three years longer in the 
study of theology. His mind was permeated with 
the doctrines of John Calvin, and he did not to the 
public seem to have any doubts regarding their 
truth. Yet we have no means of knowing that he 
at any time strongly advocated them. 

In 1586, Arminius was attracted to Padua, 
Italy, to hear the celebrated professor of philos- 
ophy, Zarabella. His mind was not greatly im- 
pressed with this master, and he tarried with him 



20 A RMINIANISM IN HIS TOR Y. 

but a short time, and then visited Kome and other 
places in Italy. In a few months he returned to 
Geneva to continue his studies. The burgomeisters 
of Amsterdam, hearing of this journey to Rome, 
which he undertook without their consent or 
knowledge, ordered his immediate return to Am- 
sterdam. This they claimed the right to do, be- 
cause they were furnishing the money for his 
education, and he was practically their servant, 
bound to them in body and mind for a lifetime. 
He was accused by some enemies of having '' kissed 
the Pope's slipper," which meant that he had be- 
come a Roman Catholic. He promptly denied this 
charge, and proved it a false accusation by a travel- 
ing companion, and that he Avas as genuine a re- 
former as any who remained at Geneva or Amster- 
dam. On leaving Geneva in the autumn of 1587, 
he received and bore away a high testimonial from 
his teachers. In it occurred this sentence: "His 
mind was in the highest degree qualified for the 
discharge of duty, should it please God at any time 
to use his ministry for the promotion of his own 
work in the Church." (Brandt, p. 53.) 

This matter having been settled, he was or- 
dained in the Reformed Church in 1588. His ex- 
amination took place before the Amsterdam Classis, 
and by the request of the authorities of the Church, 
he began his ministry in that city in officiating 
each week at the ''evening services." He delivered 
a discourse and conducted the prayers. This com- 



WHA T IS A R MINI A NISM? 2 1 

luenced on the 4th of February. He soon attracted 
such atteution by his "style of speaking," which 
was " marked by a certain sweet and native grace, 
tempered with gravity," that by the action of the 
Consistory he was placed in charge of the Church 
in Amsterdam. His church was soon crowded with 
earnest worshipers. His great soul was on fire for 
the saving and reformation of Amsterdam. The 
spirit of a real religious reformation burned within 
his breast, and he preached righteousness and true 
holiness Avith an unusual unction. Arminius was 
now in the twenty-eighth year of his age. "His 
discourses," says Brandt, "were masculine and 
erudite ; everything he uttered breathed the the- 
ologian — not raAV and commonplace, but superior, 
acute, cultivated, and replete with solid acquisitions 
both in human and in sacred literature. This made 
him such a favorite both with high and low, that 
in a short time he attracted towards himself ihe 
ears and the hearts of all classes alike. In the gen- 
eral admiration of his talents, some styled him 'a 
file of truth ;' others, ' a whetstone of intellect ;' 
others, * a pruning knife for rank growing errors ;' 
and, indeed, on the subject of religion and sacred 
study, it seemed as if scarcely anything was known 
which Arminius did not know." (Brandt, p. 57.) 
Of his visit to Rome Arminius often said that 
it was of great benefit to him, for he " saw at Rome 
a mystery of iniquity more foul than he had ever 
mentioned." He saw some of the things that had 



22 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY, 

stirred the heart of Luther, and led to a revolt from 
the thralldom of the Seven-hilled City. 

How DID Arminius come to adopt the Theory 
OPPOSED TO the Long-established Doc- 
trines OF Calvinism? 

Melanchthon in Germany held very mild opin- 
ions in regard to predestination. He would not 
accept or teach the strong doctrine as taught by 
Augustine or Gottschalk, but taught it in a manner 
that took away almost the whole of the really ob- 
jectionable. These notions were known in Ger- 
many, and spread through Holland even earlier 
than the doctrines of Calvin, and found genuine 
advocates and followers. At Amsterdam, in 1589, 
a citizen, Richard Koornhert, ''published several 
works in which he attacked the doctrine of pre- 
destination which was taught by Beza and the 
Genevan school." Koornhert's arguments were so 
fully fortified, and so sharply put, that the Hol- 
land theologians were not able to put them aside or 
show their falsity. The Dutch mind, ordinarily slow 
to act, now moved quite swiftly, and the doctrines 
of Koornhert were likely to become universal. To 
counteract these teachings, and at the same time 
help to remove some of the more objectionable 
things in Calvinism, a change or modification of 
the doctrines of Calvin as taught by Beza, was 
proposed by certain ministers about Amsterdam. 

Some of the ministers of Delft considered this 



WHAT IS ARMINIANISM? 23 

teaching of Kooruhert incendiary and destruc- 
tive, while others became convinced that Beza 
was possibly in error to some extent in his pres- 
entation of the doctrine of predestination. The 
Dutch mind was confused as to its theology as most 
of them received it. While ' ' they agreed, with Beza, 
that Divine predestination was the antecedent un- 
conditional and immutable decree of God concern- 
ing salvation and damnation of each individual," 
yet they could not agree with Beza that man, con- 
sidered before he was created, Avas made the object 
of unconditional salvation or reprobation. The 
Delft ministers w^ere not all of them advocates of 
supralapsarian predestination and reprobation, but 
held to sublapsarian election ; and this blast of 
Koornhert did not allay the excitement. 

The objection of Koornhert to Calvinism was 
that the "doctrine of absolute decrees represented 
God as the author of sin, as such decrees made sin 
necessary and inevitable no less than damnation." 
The view he published in a book called " Responsio 
ad Argumeuta Bez^ et Calvinse," etc. The book 
was reckoned heterodoxical and dangerous by the 
theologians of Delft. It savored too much of free 
thought and liberal interpretation of God's plans. 
It seemed to bring man into too familiar and easy 
intercourse with God. The book must be answered 
or refuted. 

Koornhert was Secretary of State of Holland — 
a man of learning, who looked into philosophy and 



24 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TOE Y. 

religion with the eyes of a layman. He attacked 
Romanists, Lutherans, and Calvinists alike, and 
brought forward an array of antagonisms not easily 
answered. ' ' He maintained that every religious com- 
munion needed reformation, but he said that no one 
had a right to engage in it without a mission sup- 
ported by miracles." The Calvinists of Holland, 
more than Romaoists or Lutherans, took umbrage 
at his treatment of predestination, and demanded 
its answer. The task of formulating a proper and 
convincing answer was assigned to Lydius, a profes- 
sor at Franeker. He besought Arminius to make 
the answer, to which the Amsterdam scholar and 
minister consented. 

When Arminius commenced the task of exam- 
ining the book of Koornhert, he went about it like 
a thoroughly conscientious man, honest in purpose 
and devoid of desire to deceive or be deceived. 
Arminius began at the foundation and traversed 
the entire theme of Koornhert, patiently going over 
the arguments and counter-arguments, the illustra- 
tions and Scriptures, weighing them as to their value 
and force, until his own mind was filled with doubt 
as to the truth of Calvinism. How long before he 
adopted the primitive doctrine and forsook Calvin- 
ism can not be determined. His sermons at Am- 
sterdam very soon began to have the flavor of the 
freedom of the will in matters of salvation, in op- 
position to the dogma of a necessitated will, and 
that whoever Avills to come to God by Jesus Christ 



WHA T IS A RMINIA NISMf 25 

may come and be made free. For about two years 
this clear, forcible, primitive preaching continued. 
It called forth many questions and frequent discus- 
sions between himself and the Calvinists. In 1593 
his lectures on Romans ix were published. He, in 
these, quite sharply disputed the teachings of the 
Genevan school. A party was formed against him ; 
disputes and contentions ran high. Staid old Am- 
sterdam and her burghers were for once theolog- 
ically stirred from center to circumference. It was 
soon discovered that Arminius was a disputant not 
easily handled. His steel was sharp, his arguments 
pointed, and his wit keen. It was agreed that be- 
tween all parties for the time there should be a 
truce. It was not rigidly maintained. 

The mental and spiritual exercises of Arminius 
in coming out from the mysticism and bondage of 
doubt under the doctrine of predestination and a 
necessitated will into the clear light and mental 
freedom of the doctrine as taught by the early 
Fathers of the Church, is a story of interest, for it 
is one of victory. About this time he took for a 
wife Elizabeth Real, "a woman of elegant manners 
and a great mind." She was the daughter of one 
of Amsterdam's greatest judges and senators, and 
one who had most actively defended his city 
and country against the unmitigated tyranny and 
cruelty of the Spaniards. She proved to be "en- 
dowed and adorned with hereditary virtues, most 
exemplary manners, and the love of unaffected 



26 ARMINIANISM IN HIST OR Y. 

piety" — just such a life as encouraged and stimu- 
lated the mind and heart of Arminius to study and 
teach what his conscience told him was the mind 
of God. 

Finding so much antagonism arising against his 
teaching of salvation provided for all men and the 
possibility of all men accepting by faith and re- 
ceiving pardon of sin, Arminius set a watch over 
his lips, and continued his studies carefully and 
persistently. He saw the carnal bondage of many 
of his Church, and how they needed enlightenment 
regarding the nature and bondage of sin, together 
with a freeing of their minds from '' vicious and 
distorted interpretations " of " several passages of 
Holy Writ on which, not infrequently, as an axi- 
omatic basis, were reared carnal views at variance 
with genuine Christianity." 

Not long after, he made a public exposition of 
the Epistle to the Romans. When he came to the 
words, '' For we know that the law is spiritual, but 
I am carnal, sold under sin," he clearly set forth 
his views. "His opinion was," says Brandt, ''that 
to interpret this passage as many do, of the man as 
truly and thoroughly born again through gospel 
grace, was to do the utmost to invalidate the efficacy 
of Christian regeneration and the cultivation of 
genuine piety; inasmuch as the entire exercise of 
Divine worship, all evangelical obedience, and that 
new creation which the inspired writers so often and 
so earnestly inculcate, were thereby shrunk within 



WHA T IS A RMINIA NISM ? 27 

such narrow limits as to consist, not in the effect, but 
simply in the wish. Wherefore, after accurately 
weighing in his own mind the train of thought in 
that chapter, and calling to his aid the commenta- 
I'ies of Bucer and others upon it, he publicly taught 
and maintained that St. Paul in this place does not 
speak of himself as what he then was, nor yet of a 
man living under the influence of gospel grace, but 
personates a man lying under the law, on whom the 
Mosaic law had performed its functions, and who, 
in consequence, being by the aid of the Spirit con- 
trite on account of sin, and convinced of the impo- 
tence of the law as a means of obviating salvation, 
was in quest of a deliverer, and was not regener- 
ated indeed, but in the stage next to regeneration." 
(Brandt, pp. ^Q>, 67.) 

It was not many days after this discourse before 
the tongue of criticism and slander wagged against 
Arminius. He was charged with being a Pelagian ; 
for "he ascribed too much goodness to an unregen- 
erate man." Others said he Avas an heretical teacher, 
a Socinian ; he taught directly opposed to the Bel- 
gic Confession ; he held contrary to the Palatine 
Catechism ; and he had perverted the Fathers, for 
he appealed to their teachings to confirm his. The 
public mind of Amsterdam was soon again seething 
and boiling at a furious stage. It seemed as if 
nothing would satisfy some minds but the destruc- 
tion of Arminius. The calmness of this true re- 
former was most admirable. The Classical Court 



28 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR Y. 

ordered him before them to give "satisfactory ex- 
planation of his opinion." Arminius consented to 
appear, provided it was in the presence of the rul- 
ers of the city, or their delegates, or before his 
brethren in the ministry, the elders being absent. 
It was arranged that he should appear before the 
ministers. After much and earnest prayer, he ap- 
peared, and Peter Plaucius became the advocate 
against him. Many things charged against him, 
Arminius proved he had never uttered from the 
pulpit; and others had been entirely perverted to 
an opposite meaning from what he meant. When 
they charged him with Pelagianism, he denied it, 
and '' contended that by no legitimate process could 
they be elicited from his exposition in question, but, 
on the contrary, were manifestly repugnant to it." 
Arminius showed that he had correctly quoted from 
and interpreted the writings of the ancient divines, 
or Fathers, and that Bucer and Erasmus, of modern 
times, agreed with his interpretations of the Epistle 
to the Romans. Regarding the charge that he 
taught contrary to the Catechism and Confession, 
he took ample time to show that he "had taught 
nothing whatever contrary to these formularies of 
mutual consent, and that his doctrine on the point 
in question could be easily reconciled with them." 
(Brandt, pp. 69-70.) Rising to a consciousness 
that he had certain mental and spiritual rights, he 
declared that ' ' he was in no respect bound to every 
private interpretation of the Reformed, but was 



WIIA T IS A EM INT A XI'iM. 29 

plainly free, and entitled to expound the heavenly 
oracles and particular passages of the sacred vol- 
ume according to the dictates of conscience ; and 
that, in so doing, he would ever be on his guard 
against advancing aught which tends to tear up the 
foundation of the Christian faith." (Ibid., p. 70.) 
While by the majority Arminius was cleared of 
all guilt under these charges, still there were in- 
dividuals who clamored for his arrest and deposi- 
tion, and sought by every means to detract from his 
greatness, his innocence, and his usefulness. Chief 
among these traducers was this same Peter Plaucius. 
He was not satisfied with traducing the character of 
the minister in Amsterdam, but at The Hague and 
elsewhere. M. Lydius and Uytenbogaert went to 
Amsterdam in the fond hope of settling matters, 
and restoring harmony, but all to no purpose. At 
last the matter was brought before the new sena- 
tors, who invited the retiring senators to sit with 
them, and they determined to hear the charges of 
Plaucius and others, and Arminius's answer. The 
senators, the 11th of February, heard the case. 
After the charges had been presented and advo- 
cated fully, Arminius was permitted to speak in 
his own behalf. This he did in his own masterly 
manner. He took up the charges item by item, 
and showed clearly that what he taught was not 
against the Catechism or Belgic Confession, but 
in harmony with them in his interpretation of 
Romans vii. What seemed to be at variance was 
3 



30 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR Y. 

Dot with the authorized standards, but the inter- 
pretations of some divines. He entered a strong 
plea for freedom of conscience in Scripture inter- 
pretation. He said ''he had not entertained a 
doubt that it would be free to him, in the exercise 
of that liberty, to discuss sacred subjects which be- 
long to all Christians and Christian teachers wliat- 
soever, to expound this or that passage of Scripture 
according to the dictates of conscience. Further, 
since the hinge of the existing difference turned 
mainly on this point, that some thought his opinion 
of that passage opposed to the received ecclesiastical 
formularies, and that this was a charge of which he 
could be easily convicted, he, for his part, held him- 
self in readiness, for the vindication of his name, to 
enter into a conference with his compeers ; but he 
earnestly entreated that such conference should 
take place in the presence of the senators them- 
selves, or their delegates ; for he anticipated that 
the issue of this case would be more satisfactory 
were these influential men to be present, not as 
witnesses merely, but as moderators and righteous 
arbiters in respect to all that might be advanced on 
either side." (Brandt, pp. 83-84.) 

As soon as his assailants could get the floor, they 
demanded that the conference or discussion be held 
in the presence of the Classis, and not before the 
senators. But the honorable senators took occasion 
to order all the ministers to retire, after which they 
deliberated as to the merits of the charges against 



WHA T IS ARM INI A NISM. 3 1 

Arminius, the manner in which they were advo- 
cated, and the gentle, learned, and logical reply of 
Arminius. The unanimous decision of the senators 
was presented by their president: — "That it was 
the opinion and decree of the honorable senators 
that the Church Court should allow this whole mat- 
ter to rest, and permit whatever discussions had 
arisen out of it up to this time to be consigned to 
oblivion. A fresh conference upon it did not appear 
to them to be suitable, or likely to do good. They 
(the ministers) must henceforth be on their guard, 
lest any of them should give vent to new doctrines 
from the pulpit. Should any of them have opinions 
in which they differed from other divines, and on 
which they boasted a profounder knowledge, it 
would be incumbent on them to reserve these to 
themselves, and to talk them over in a friendly 
manner with their compeers. Meanwhile, those 
who think diiferently, and who can not be con- 
vinced of error, must be calmly foreborne with 
until the points in dispute be decided by the 
authority of some council." 

Having rendered this decision, two of the sen- 
ators added a "very grave and serious admoni- 
tion, . . . to cultivate that fraternal harmony 
and peace by which they were wont to be dis- 
tinguished." (Brandt, p. 85.) 

Thus this great thinker, eminent scholar, and 
devout Christian, Arminius, was again vindicated. 



Chapter II. 

ARMINIUS AS PROFESSOR AT LEYDEN. 

Pestilence in Holland — Death of Junius, a Professor of Di- 
vinity at Leyden — James Arminius proposed for the 
Vacancy — The Opposition of Gomarus — His Address to 
the Curators — They determined to have Arminius— Not 
inclined to accept — The Objections at Amsterdam over- 
come — Released — Elected— Examined for the Doctor- 
ate — Success — His Oration on the Occasion — His Ora- 
tions on taking his Chair — Effect upon the Students — 
Enemies— Said that ^Predestination made God the Au- 
thor of Sin— Made EectorMagnific—Hominius— Follow- 
ers of Arminius accused of his Crimes— Excitement 
spread to Other Ecclesiastical Bodies— Address on Right- 
eousness and Divine Providence— Two Significant Facts : 
1st. People misquoted and perverted his Meaning; 2d. 
He never failed to meet any Disputant on the Ques- 
tions of Doctrine — Question of a National Synod — Ar- 
minius's Oration — Why a National Synod had not 
been convened — A Sjaiod ordered by the States Gen- 
eral—Controversy as to Revision— A S,>aiod of South 
Holland at Gorcum— Call made upon the Leyden Pro- 
fessors as to the Belgic Confession and Palatinate Cate- 
chism — Opportunity for Arminius to speak of the Con- 
fession — Petition for a Preliminary Synod at The 
Hague— Arminius's Letter to Hyppolitns— Apology - 
Declaration of Sentiments at The Hague— The Misfor- 
tune of his Death— His Motto— Grotius's Remark con- 
cerning Arminius. 

A PESTILENCE raged in Holland, and the chair 
of Divinity in the University of Leyden was made 
vacant by the death of Francis Junius in 1602. 
32 



ABMI^^IUS AS FBOFESSOI^ AT LEYDEN. 66 

The curators of the university were favorably im- 
pressed with James xlrmiuius, from what they had 
learned of his ability, and selected him as their 
candidate for the successor. When the chair was 
tendered to Arminius he felt himself under obliga- 
tions to the Church at Amsterdam, because of their 
having furnished the money for his education, and 
reported the case to them. The burghers of Am- 
sterdam were unwilling to release him from his 
pulpit ; but Uytenbogaert, who at this time was 
minister at The Hague and chaplain to Maurice, 
Prince of Orange, succeeded in obtaining his re- 
lease from his contract with the men of Amsterdam. 
There were many of the Calvinistic ministers 
who were opposed to Arminius becoming professor of 
Divinity at Leyden, because of his well-known 
auti-Calvinistic notions. Among these was Profes- 
sor Gomarus, one of the Divinity professors at 
Leyden, who to the end of his life continued to 
antagonize Arminius. Gomarus was a man of cul- 
ture and influence, but was the embodiment of 
strong prejudices. He had been appointed by the 
curators of the Leyden Academy to deliver the 
funeral oration in honor of Junius. When the 
curators were in session, Gomarus went into their 
presence to report his discharge of the duty im- 
posed upon him and present them with a copy of 
his oration. He took occasion to speak against 
James Arminius, who he had heard was their can- 
didate for a successor of Junius. He gave them to 



34 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY, 

understand that to himself Arminius was very of- 
fensive ; that Junius, while living, "had no favor- 
able opinion of Arminius." In Amsterdam " he 
had it in his power to infect one Church only, but 
here he could infect many, not only in this but in 
other lands." He accused Arminius of self-seeking, 
"but no faith was to be attached to his words." 
The effect of this speech was rather to lead some to 
sympathy with Arminius ; for when Gomarus was 
asked if he knew Arminius, he was compelled to 
say "he only saluted him once, as he descried him 
at a little distance." When questioned as to how 
he knew about the peculiar teachings of Arminius, 
he said he had it "from ministers most worthy of 
credit." When pressed for the names of those min- 
isters he could only name Plaucius. 

These curators put but little confidence in the 
address of Gomarus, or reference to Plaucius, but 
set about finding out for themselves as to their ac- 
cusations. They called into their council John 
Van Olden Barneveldt, who advised them to consult 
Uytenbogaert. After a careful and searching ex- 
amination, they found James Arminius an innocent 
man, and all they could desire as the successor of 
Junius. 

When the proposition of the curators was pre- 
sented to Arminius, he promptly dissented from 
their choice. He questioned his own ability, the 
willingness of the senators of Amsterdam to release 
him, and the consent of his enemies to allow him 



ARMINIUS AS PItOFESSOB AT LEYDEN. 35 

to take the honorable chair. Some great names 
were arrayed against Arminius, while as equally 
famous men stood for his election. There were 
sharp discussions on both sides. Gomarus led the 
party against Arminius, while Uytenbogaert led the 
party for him. The sermons, addresses, letters, and 
conversations of Arminius were read, criticised, dis- 
cussed, condemned, and praised. The curators pa- 
tiently heard all that was said. Not once was 
Arminius before them. He was informed of all 
the proceedings; he w^as not flustered, angered, or 
discouraged, but left all in the hands of Providence, 
knowing that he had not done or said anything 
worthy of such condemnation. Calmly he Avaited 
the issue. His dear friend, Uytenbogaert, wrote 
him these consoling words : "I would have you be 
of good cheer. . . . The Lord God will pro- 
vide, and grant that success which he knows will 
be most conducive to his own glory and the edifi- 
cation of the Church, yea, more, and to the salva- 
tion of me and mine. On him I cast all my care. 
He will bring forth my righteousness as the light, 
and my judgment as the noonday." (Brandt, 162.) 
Every step of the way to the professorship at 
Leyden, Arminius was stopped by objections, ques- 
tions of doctrine, suspicions, attacks of enemies, — 
led mostly by Gomarus. At last all seemed cleared 
away. The curators said "that the suspicions 
stirred against Arminius had not been substan- 
tiated, nor was there just cause why any one should 



36 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR Y. 

judge unfavorably respecting him ; for in the ex- 
ercise of liberty granted him of prophesying [of 
discussing sacred things] in the Church, he had 
taught nothing that was inimical to the Christian 
religion." (Brandt, pp. 179, 180.) 

Having been called and elected to the profes- 
sorship, the next step was to be made a doctor, and 
invested with the office. On the 19th of June, he 
was examined by Gomarus before Grotius and 
Merula. All expressed themselves as fully satis- 
fied with the examination. On the 10th of July, 
Arminius held a disputation on the subject "Con- 
cerning the Nature of God." His opponents were 
Peter Bertius, Hominius, Crucius, and Grevinchov- 
ius. He held his place against them in a manner 
to gain " universal applause." The next day, Go- 
marus invested Arminius with the honor of the well- 
earned Doctor's degree, with the usual formalities. 
At the same time Arminius delivered his great ora- 
tion " Concerning the Priestly Office of Christ." The 
testimonial, or diploma, given by the academy to 
Arminius, is full of flattery of its kind. It is recorded 
that Arminius was the first to receive the Doctor's 
degree at Leyden. 

On taking his chair, he found that the stu- 
dents of the university of Leyden had been giving 
more attention to the intricate controversies and 
knotty questions of the schoolmen than to the 
studies of the Scripture and theology. The spirit 
in which he entered upon his work is expressed by 



A BiMIXI US AS FB OFESS OE AT LE YD EN. 3 7 

himself iu a letter of September 22, 1603. *' I will, 
therefore, with the help of the good God, address 
myself to this province, and look for success by his 
abundant blessing. He knows from what* motive 
I have undertaken this office, what is my aim, what 
object I have in view in discharging the duties of 
it. He discerns and approves, I know. It is not 
the empty honor of this world — mere smoke and 
bubble — nor the desire of amassing wealth (which 
indeed were in vain, let me strive to the utmost), 
that has impelled me hither ; but my one wish is 
to do public service in the gospel of Christ, and to 
exhibit that gospel as powerfully and plainly as 
possible before those who are destined, in their 
time, to propagate it to others." (Brandt, pp. 
187-188.) 

Such a spirit led him to give three "elegant 
and polished orations" on these topics, "Of the 
Object of Sacred Theology," " Of the Author and 
End of Theology," and "Certitude." "By this 
method," writes Brandt, "he strove to instill into 
the minds of the students a love for that divine 
and most dignified of all the sciences; and at his 
very entrance into his office he judged with Soc- 
rates, the wisest of the Gentiles, that the prin- 
cipal part of his responsibility stood fulfilled could 
he only succeed in inflaming his disciples with an 
ardent desire of learning." 

His first effort was to change the condition of 
things he found at Leyden, and he began by lee- 



38 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR Y. 

tures on the Bible as " the foundation of all truth." 
During this time he brought out in his lectures to 
the students his full and free method of Scripture 
interpretation, which charmed his hearers, and 
made the curators rejoice in this acquisition of so 
great and noble a teacher in place of Junius, who 
had been removed by the hand of death. 

In the meantime, the enemies of Arminius were 
suspicious, and watching for an opportunity to as- 
sail his character and destroy his reputation. An 
occasion presented itself in a little time. Two stu- 
dents of theology invited him to "honor with his 
presence their theses, or positions, which they had 
drawn up to be subjected to public examination." 
One was on Justification, the other on Original Sin. 
Arminius knew that other professors had been pres- 
ent under such circumstances, when the doctrine of 
the theses was not according to their mind. Now, 
since there were some things in these he did not in- 
dorse, his enemies made it an occasion of great fault- 
finding. While no open rupture followed, Gomarus 
sought, by mutterings, to poison the minds of stu- 
dents, curators, and the public, and set them 
against him. The next year Arminius began a 
course of lectures on the Old Testament, with an 
occasional *' exposition of certain portions of the 
New." This so greatly displeased Gomarus that, 
meeting Arminius, he broke out in "a burst of 
passion," saying : "You have invaded my profes- 
sorship !" To this, Arminius made the defense that 



ABIIIXIUS AS FBOFESSOE AT LEYDEN. 39 

the curators had given him a certificate "to select 
themes for prelection at any time, not only from 
the Old Testament, but also from the New, pro- 
vided he did not encroach upon the particular sub- 
ject in which Gomarus might be engaged." While 
he had not in fact trenched upon the rights of Go- 
marus, the charge was made, and served as an oc- 
casion for other charges and complaints. 

There were many injurious reports circulated 
by his enemies, which had a tendency to injure his 
reputation with the Government and among the 
Churches. During the years 1605-1608 there was 
a constant besieging of Arminius on the question 
of predestination. At first he was led to answer in 
moderate terms, though holding the views that later 
were more fully and sharply advocated. He did 
not desire to stir up unnecessary antagonism to him- 
self, or lead men to the advocacy of what he be- 
lieved to be wrong. Gomarus, as the leader, and 
Helmichius, John Kuchlinas his uncle, Lansber- 
gius, and others, were constantly throwing out hints 
as to Arminius's heterodoxy, and made charges 
against his integrity as a Christian man, and in 
many ways sought to annoy him, and lead to a 
statement of his doctrines, so that, as ardent be- 
lievers in unconditional predestination, they might 
have somewhat against him as a believer in the 
feeedom of the will, and that Jesus Christ died to 
make salvation possible for all men. They often 
said, Arminius is to be ranked with the Pelagians, 



40 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

though the assertion was as often refuted. It is prob- 
able that he rasped their feelings when he said of 
the predestinationism of Calvin, Beza, and Gomarus, 
that it "made God the aidhorofsin." "His ad- 
versaries left no means untried by which to burn 
some brand of contumely into his rising reputation." 
A rumor was set afloat by some means, which went 
out through all Holland, that " the professors of 
sacred literature differed seriously among them- 
selves." The matter became one of great discus- 
sion. Brandt says that this "was everywhere in 
the mouths of carders, furriers, weavers, and other 
artisans of that class." A novel thing occurred in 
this wild and ignorant dispute. Many of them er- 
roneously attributed the opinions of Arminius to 
Gomarus, and the dogmas of Gomarus to Arminius. 
There is no doubt that good finally ultimated from 
this great discussion. 

Early in 1605 the curators of the Ley den Uni- 
versity presented Arminius with the fasces of the 
incorporation, and gave him the title of "Rector 
Mao:nific." This new honor evidenced how he stood 
with them, and was a sure indication that these 
laymen had all confidence in his learning, integrity, 
and skill in conducting the affairs of their rising 
school. But this only led his enemies to a bitterer 
warfare. If he chanced to "advance certain argu- 
ments which Avere also employed by popish writers 
themselves, by Lutherans, and others besides the 
Reformed, the clamor was forthwith raised by ig- 



A RMINIUS AS PR OFESS OR AT LE YD EX. 4 1 

norant persons that he had gone over to the ene- 
my's camp." (Brandt, p. 209.) 

About the university and in Leyden matters 
were all astir, and temper was at fever-heat. It 
seemed as if nearly all of accusation was against 
Arminius. The basest construction was placed on 
" his best words and deeds." It was charged that he 
circulated his own written books among his stu- 
dents, following in that respect Calvin, Junius, and 
others. This act Avas called a crime. He was 
charged with teaching against unconditional pre- 
destination. One Festus Hominius was bold to ut- 
ter severe charges against Arminius behind his 
back which he dared not repeat before his face. 

His followers and admirers came in for a large 
share of accusation "of the same crimes which 
were imputed to himself; the discourses and argu- 
ments by which they sought to establish the doctrines 
of the Christian faith being subjected to misinter- 
pretation." If a student became in any way a spe- 
cial admirer of Arminius, or seemed to be a fa- 
voi-ite with him, he was instantly marked, and some 
new insult was heaped upon Arminius. 

This feverish excitement soon spread to some 
ecclesiastical bodies, and charges were made against 
various persons who in any sense favored Arminius 
and his doctrines. It did not require a very acute 
observer of the events of history to prognosticate 
that the time would come when an open rupture on 
doctrine would occur, which might involve the 



42 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

States of Holland as well as the Church of the Re- 
formed, and might be accompanied by instances of 
bloodshed and martyrdom. Intolerance on the part 
of the Reformed might develop what followed the 
intolerance of the Papal Church. 

Arminius, on the 4th of May, 1605, demon- 
strated his belief in Divine Providence in a public 
disputation " Concerning the Righteousness and Ef- 
ficacy of Divine Providence Respecting Evil." His 
thesis was one of his most polished and elaborately 
prepared. " He very learnedly," says Brandt, "ex- 
plained in what manner it had to do, not only with 
the beginning, but also with the progress and with 
the end of sin. Making allusion, in another place, 
to the circumstance and that controversy, he ob- 
serves : ' There are two stumbling-blocks against 
which I am solicitously on my guard — not to make 
God the author of sin, and not to do away with 
the freedom inherent in the human will ; which 
two things, if any one knows to avoid, there is no 
action he shall imagine which I will not most 
cheerfully allow to be ascribed to the providence 
of God, if due regard be only had to the Divine 
excellence.'" (Brandt, p. 221.) 

The student of Arminianism will not fail to ob- 
sei've two most significant facts. When Arminius 
gave utterance to any doctrine, however carefully 
worded, he was at once misquoted, his statements 
perverted to other meanings than such as he in- 
tended, and constructions placed upon his doctrines 



ARMINIUS AS PROFESSOR AT LETDEN. 43 

foreign to their original intent. When he appealed 
to his written statements — for he was very scrupu- 
lous to preserve his thoughts carefully written out, 
in either Latin or his native tongue — and compared 
his doctrines with that of the early Church, he si- 
lenced the cavilers, and often they were forced to 
admit the truth of his teachings as being in har- 
mony with the doctrines of the Fathers and the 
Scriptures. It mattered not whether he was called 
before the Classis, the curators, the National Synod, 
the faculty of the university, in a private company, 
or by a single person, Arminius was always ready, 
armed and equipped for a disputation, and always 
clearly gave a reason for his faith and doctrine, 
backing them up Avith many Scriptures, with refer- 
ence to the early Fathers and to some of the mod- 
ern divines, who held to views similar to his own. 
It will also be observed that he never hesitated 
to appear, when appeal was made, to meet the best 
disputants on these great questions ; nor did he 
swerve from the same faith, having once become 
fully persuaded of its truth. He w^as always the 
advocate of salvation provided for all men, free- 
dom of the will to choose or reject God's offers of 
mercy, and that, under an unconditional election, 
God was the author of sin. When stirred to his 
soul's depths by a consideration of the dangers re- 
sulting from teaching the doctrine of unconditional 
predestination, he spoke to the point, and men knew 
precisely what he meant. 



44 ARMINIANI8M IN HISTORY. 

The Question of a National Synod. 

Arminius saw the strife and disputation in his 
loved Netherlands on those subjects which were 
purely of a theological character, and he also knew 
that they might be carried so far as to assume a 
political cast. Having brought his lectures on Jo- 
nah to a close, and opened the year 1606 with a 
course on Malachi, on the eighth day of February 
he resigned his rectorship of the School of Theology. 
A goodly company were assembled, and he gave 
his excellent oration on "Religious Dissension." 
The oration was not the spontaneous offering of the 
hour, but something he had carefully prepared after 
fully thinking out all its points, and noting its bear- 
ings upon the discussions of the day. 

In this oration he unfolded the subject of dis- 
sension in its " nature and effects, causes and rem- 
edies, with such freedom of speech as the weight of 
the subject itself and the agitated circumstances of 
the Church seemed to require. In particular, as 
the remedy commonly considered to be the most effi- 
cacious for allaying theological dissensions, was a 
convention of the parties at variance (which the 
Greeks call a Synod, the Latins a Council), he un- 
folded on that same occasion, fully and piously, the 
principle on which a Council of the kind referred to 
ought to be constituted, so as to warrant the just 
and rational expectation that it will issue in good 
works of the most salutary character." (Brandt, 
p. 246.) 



ABMINIUS AS PROFESSOR AT LETDEN. 45 

There bad been a demand made some years be- 
fore this for a National Synod. As early as 1597 
discussions and controversies had arisen in such 
places as Gonda, Hoorn, and Medenblick, "not 
only respecting Divine predestination, but also con- 
cerning the authority of the Belgic Confession and 
Palatine Catechism, and the right and orthodox in- 
terpretation of certain phrases." The demand was 
so great that finally some of the States of Holland 
led in granting liberty to their pastors to hold such 
a Synod. It was expressly stated " that the Belgic 
Confession of Faith should be revised, and that it 
should be carefully considered in what way, most 
fitly, according to the Word of God, the true doc- 
trine and concord of the Reformed Church of the 
Netherlands might be vindicated, preserved, and 
promoted, and the dissensions that had arisen be 
allayed." {Ibid., 247.) 

But the States General had not considered it 
necessary to convene a National Synod, even though 
many of the States had asked for it. When "Ar- 
minius began to be celebrated, and his words moved 
other Holland professors and pastors who differed 
from him in doctrine, leave was given, March 15, 
1606, by the States General, to the assembling of 
a National Synod. The States General of the Neth- 
erlands marked out for it the same terms and duties 
as eight years previously had been designated. The 
Synod was to make *' revision of the Confession 
[Belgic] and Catechism of said Churches [Re- 
4 



46 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

formed], and of the Ecclesiastical Constitution here- 
tofore in use among them." (Brandt, p. 249.) 

Immediately there sprung up much discussion 
over the word "revision." One party claimed that 
it was used in a " forensic " sense, and meant that 
"the entire doctrine comprehended in the summa- 
ries was called in question ; that by this edict in- 
jury was done to these sacred canons of the Re- 
formed faith, which were formerly received with so 
great apj^lause." The Reformed pastors and pro- 
fessors, heartily holding to " unconditional predesti- 
nation " and the accompanying doctrines, were wholly 
opposed to the word "revision," while Arminius, 
Uytenbogaert, and men of like faith, held to the 
word "revision." Some said it was only to be a 
"re-examination" of the Confession. 

Controversy and discussion waxed warm. The 
sturdy Dutch were moved. A Synod of South 
Holland was held in August, 1606, at Gorcum, 
known in local liistory as the Gorcum Synod. A 
committee of four men were appointed to proceed 
to Leyden and interview the professors of theology, 
and ask them " to peruse and examine with all dil- 
igence the Confession and Catechism hitherto in use 
in these realms." These professors were requested 
"that if, in these writings of the Confession and 
the Catechism, any one had observed aught worthy 
of remark, he should signify the same, and set it 
forth in good and solid reasons and arguments 
as speedily as practicable, and that, if possible. 



A RMINI US AS PR OFUSS OR AT LE YDBy. 4 7 

before the next meeting of the Classis." (^Ibld., 
256.) 

The Synod also, by letter, apprised other Synods 
in the various States- of the Netherlands of what 
they had done. When the committee reached Ley- 
den they first called on Gomarus and made known 
their errand. He hesitated, and declined to make 
answer unless the dean (Arminius) would call the 
theological faculty together. Trelcatius answered 
much the same way. The committee said that the 
Synod desired their answers as individuals — profes- 
sors — and not as a faculty. When Arminius was 
waited upon, he at once acquiesced in the request of 
the Gorcum Synod. He thought the proper way 
was for each professor to give the result of his in- 
dependent examination of the Confession and Cat- 
echism, and not give the result as a faculty. Go- 
marus and Trelcatius finally consented to follow the 
course of Arminius. 

The way seemed providentially opened for the 
great mind and heart of Arminius to have full play 
in an interpretation of the Confession as harmo- 
nized with Scripture. He made a most careful re- 
view of the Belgic Confession, and the Palatinate 
Catechism, and the polity of the Reformed Church 
in Holland. He counseled with his friends of like 
views. He confided much in the judgment of John 
Halsberg, a faithful minister of the Church at Am- 
sterdam. Unfortunately, this noble friend was 
soon stricken down by death, and Arminius mourned 



48 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR T. 

him as a brother beloved. It seemed all-important 
that at this time Arminius should remain in good 
health, so as to prosecute his studies and prepare 
his papers for the coming Synod. 

It was marvelous how many arose to malign this 
great scholar and eminent Christian. He who saw 
more clearly the light of God's truth than the ma- 
jority of thinkers, and sought to break the fetters 
fastened upon so many minds, was hated, scorned, 
scoffed, persecuted everywhere. But he held on, 
true to God and his Scripture, with a heart 
abounding in love for his fellow-men bound in 
chains of sin. 

The deputies of South and North Holland pe- 
titioned the States General for a preliminary Synod, 
to be held at The Hague, to arrange the details and 
work of the National Synod. After due delibera- 
tion the request was granted, and the 22d of May, 
1608, fixed as the date of its sitting. Much dis- 
cussion was carried forward in almost every part 
of the two Hollands. Aspersions were made against 
Arminius. He often met and refuted them in his 
accustomed manner. Forbearance at last ceased 
to be a virtue, and early in 1608 he began a de- 
fense, in vindication of himself and his teachings, 
in three ways — 

1. By a request and a subsequent letter, ad- 
dressed to Hippolytus a Collibus, the ambassador 
to the States of the United Provinces of the illus- 
trious Prince Palatine, Frederick the Fourth. 



A Ji^fI^^I us AS pn ofi:ss or at le yd ex. 49 

Following this, he was admitted, on invitation of 
the ambassador, to his court at The Hague. Hip- 
polytus received the Leyden professor courteously, 
and heard a candid and accurate explanation of his 
opinions "concerning the Divinity of the Son of 
God, Providence and Divine predestination, Grace 
and Free-will, and also on the subject of Justifica- 
tion." This learned and candid nobleman grasped 
the arguments of Arminius, and accepted them as 
the true expression of the mind of God regarding 
these important doctrines. At the solicitation of 
Hippolytus, i\.rminius drew up (April 5, 1608) that 
"most erudite and elaborate epistle," which is now 
among the published works of Arminius. It is "a 
succinct defense of his doctrine, as well as of his 
life.'' (Brandt, p. 302.) 

2. By a reply " which is esteemed as an apology 
to thirty-one defamatory articles falsely ascribed to 
him and Adrian Borrius." 

3. By the Declaration of Sentiments, delivered 
on the 30th of October, 1608, before the repre- 
sentatives of the States in full assembly at The 
Hague (which will be noticed in a succeeding 
chapter). In this Declaration of Sentiments Ar- 
minius presented in a most successful manner 
the subjects of predestination. Divine providence, 
the freedom of the will, the grace of God, the Di- 
vinity of the Son of God, and the justification of 
men before God. He then followed each case 
with an argument of his own in opposition, estab- 



5'0 A RI/IINIA NISM IN HlS T OR Y. 

lishing his propositions by reference to the Scrip- 
tures, the teachings of the Fathers, and to the 
history of the early Church. 

It is a great misfortune, as it seems, so soon 
after the conclusion of his defense of the position 
which he had taken regarding Calvinism, that, 
at the age of forty-nine years, he should have ceased 
to work and live. His death occurred on the 19th 
of October, 1609. 

James Arminius was distinguished among men 
for "the virtue and amiability of his private, do- 
mestic, and social character among Christians ; for 
his charity toward those who differed from him in 
opinion ; among preachers for his zeal, eloquence, 
and success ; and among divines for his acute yet 
large and comprehensive views of theology, his 
skill in argument, and candor and courtesy in con- 
troversy." He was a man of great learning; his 
influence in the religious world had really but just 
begun, and had another decade of years been added 
to his life, there is no telling what he might have 
accomplished. His death left the controversy be- 
tween the Calvinists and his own party in such a 
condition that some one must take it up and carry 
it forward. His motto was ^^ Bona conscientia par- 
adisus — A good conscience is a paradise." The great 
Hugo Grotius said of him : " Condemned by others, 
he condemned none." 



Chapter 111. 

ARMINIAN IvEADERS. 

Leaders in Arminianism— Simon Episcopins, a Great Scholar 
and Theologian — Edncation — Adopted by the Senate of 
Amsterdam — At the University of Leyden— His Theses 
and Disputations— When he adopted Arminianism — A 
Student of Gomarus and Arminius — Arminius made the 
Greater Impression — Episcopius the Defender of Armin- 
ianism — Uytenhogaert — Eine Personal Appearance — 
Pastor at Utrecht — Formerly a Student with Arminius 
at Geneva — Uytenhogaert Anxious for Toleration— Pre- 
sided at Remonstrant Sj^iod at Wallevick — Chaplain to 
an Embassy to Paris — At Antwerp— Goods confiscated 
and he banished — Fled to Rouen — Secret Return to Rot- 
terdam—Sentence revoked — Obtained a Part of his 
Goods — Prohibited from preaching— Strictly v^'atched — 
Died — Hugo Grotius — Born — At Leyden — Wrote a 
Poem— At Paris — Eminently a Litterateur- Pensioner 
of Rotterdam — In England — Utopian Scheme with Ca- 
saubon -Embraced Arminianism — Wrote Much for it — 
A Strong Support— Arrested and a Prisoner at Loewen- 
stein — Novel Escape— In France— Died at Roostock — 
Buried at Delft — Barneveldt, a Layman— Life Admi- 
rably written by Motley — Conflict — Remonstrants — 
Counter- remonstrants— Five Points of Calvinism — Five 
Arminian Articles— The Things they controvei-ted — The 
Vote against Arminianism — The Victory over Armin- 
ianism was not of Advantage to Calvinism— Statement 
of Mosheim. 

The death of James Arminius in 1609 did not 
stop the great controversy between Calvinism and 
what we will from this time call Arminianism. 

51 



52 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR Y. 

While the Calvinists in HoUai^ outnumbered the 
Arminians several times, and theirs was the popular 
belief because the Government sided with it, there 
were many strong, cultured, and conscientious men, 
scholars of the upper class, who embraced Armin- 
ianism as the only true explanation of the Divine 
government in the matter of original sin, freedom 
of the will, and the salvation of men. The con- 
troversy was carried forward, some of the time, 
under the auspices of the State, and at others in a 
more private manner, and in the Churches. At 
times there was the spirit of kindness in the discus- 
sions, but generally the opposite feeling prevailed. 
This controversy continued until the whole of Hol- 
land was in a blaze of excitement. 

Simon Episcopius. 

The mantle of the great Armiuius fell upon Si- 
mon Episcopius (1583-1644), a worthy successor of 
so great a man. Episcopius was called at once to 
become the professor of Theology in Leyden Uni- 
versity, in the place vacated by the death of 
Arminius. Another great Arminian writer w^as 
James Uytenbogaert (1557-1644), preacher at The 
Hague for many years, and "for some time chap- 
lain of Prince Maurice." These two men became 
the principal leaders in the controversy, and man- 
fully maintained the honor and dignity of Armin- 
ianism against all adversaries. There were two 
other notable advocates of Arminianism — one a 



A R MINI A N LEADERS. 53 

layman, the other a clergyman. The one was John 
Van Olden Barneveldt (1549-1619), advocate- 
general of Holland and Friesland, a statesman of 
high standing, and one of the foremost men of the 
Dutch Republic. He was a staunch friend of Ar- 
minins, and a firm believer in the doctrine ; and 
while others were going away to the extreme of 
Calvinism, he returned from his former belief in 
Calvinism to a belief in the opposite. Hugo Gro- 
tius (1583-1645), "the most comprehensive scholar 
of his age, equally distinguished as statesman, ju- 
rist, theologian, and exegete, sympathized with the 
Arminians." These two noble men gave all their 
weight of influence to the side of the Arminians, 
and by words and actions sought to advance peace 
and toleration. 

Simon Episcopius, whose real name was Bisschop, 
was born at Amsterdam, of honorable Christian par- 
ents of the Refoi-med belief. Very early in life 
this youth gave decisive proofs of a vigorous un- 
derstanding and capacious memory, accompanied 
with an ardent desire to obtain information. The 
time of his birth was filled with danger to all of the 
Reformed faith in Holland ; for the persecutions 
carried on by the Spanish Alva were cruel and un- 
mixed with the least grain of mercy. He was des- 
tined by his parents for one of the learned professions, 
but, by request of Burgomeister Benning, he was 
finally devoted "to the pursuit of literature." At 
the public Latin school, under the rectorship of 



54 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

Beckemanus, he made ''rapid progress in the acqui- 
sition of the Greek and Latin languages." His 
rapid advancement and brilliant mind brought him 
to the attention of the Senate of Amsterdam as a 
specially bright man, and one worthy of their con- 
sideration. They had found before this, in adopt- 
ing Arminius, that they had adopted a man who 
reflected great glory upon their State, and so they 
were ready and willing to look for others of the 
same general character. The Senate adopted him 
as one of their alumni, ovVoesterlings, and furnished 
him the means to complete his education. Whether 
there was an agreement that he should return, at 
the completion of his education, and engage as 
their minister, or not, is not known. He was 
placed in the University of Leyden, where he com- 
pleted his course, and was made Master of Arts 
February 27, 1606. Now his theological studies 
commenced, and were chiefly prosecuted under the 
direction of James Arminius. 

In his theses and disputations Episcopius exhib- 
ited great skill and learning. His proficiency soon 
led the curators and professors to recognize him 
as "in every way worthy to enter the ministry." 
This information having been communicated to 
those of Amsterdam, the Senate and magistrates of 
that city desired to hear him for themselves, and 
appointed the 11th of June, 1607, as the time, and 
the New South Church as the place, for his sermon. 
A splendid Dutch audience assembled to hear and 



ARMINIA N LEAD ERS. 55 

judge for themselves as to this remarkable rising 
man. It was a season of great test to himself; for, 
if he should fail in his undertaking to preach a 
sermon that should produce a marked effect upon 
their minds and thus establish his reputation, his 
future history would be greatly changed. The au- 
dience was not disappointed. He impressed them 
as a master workman, clear in his illustration, strong 
in his logic, elegant in his rhetoric. Episcopius 
was very soon called "the Dutch Cicero." His ap- 
pointment soon came as court preacher or chaplain 
to Prince Maurice, and also preacher at The Hague. 
At this time he came into intimate relations with 
the great statesman, John of Barneveldt, an emi- 
nent Arminian. 

As to the time when Episcopius changed his 
views from Calvinism to Arminianism, we are wholly 
unable to disco vei*. It is probable that the seeds 
of a change were early planted in his mind, and 
that the real change was a thing gradual in itself. 
When he became a student in theology he had for two 
of his professors, Gomarus, the ardent Calvinist, and 
James Arminius, the equally ardent antagonist of the 
doctrines of predestination. Arminius seems to have 
given the stronger impression to the young mind, 
and left him wholly freed from the bondage of Cal- 
vinism. During the latter part of his stay at Ley- 
den the discussions between Arminius and Gomarus 
commenced- At first they were very private be- 
tween themselves, but soon began to be open and 



56 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR T. 

public. Episcopius's taste for discussion naturally 
led him to take a great interest in these discussions. 
These disputations concerning predestination were 
destined thoroughly to agitate all the Netherlands, 
and finally to reach to regions far away. After 
the death of Arminius it became necessary for 
Episcopius to defend the memory of his great 
friend and teacher — a task which he performed in 
the most admirable manner. 

Uytenbogaert. 

Uytenbogaert was an able defender of Armin- 
ianism, standing by the side of Simon Episcopius, 
and making himself, by his logic and great attain- 
ments, sensibly felt in these theological discussions. 
He became a leader of the Remonstrants, " was an 
independent and earnest, and yet a moderate and 
considerate man, everywhere maintaining a firm 
and upright character, and incessantly engaged in 
making peace among the parties of Protestantism. 
As a preacher he stood in the front ranks of 
the Remonstrants, for his logic, rhetoric, and per- 
suasive eloquence. He was a native of Utrecht, 
born 1557. His theological studies were con- 
ducted at Geneva, under Beza. On completing 
his course of study he became pastor of a Church 
in Utrecht in 1584, but was dismissed, because 
of his liberal views regarding predestination and 
the other doctrines of Calvinism, in 1589. The 
succeeding year he was called to The Hague, and 



A RMINIA JSr L EA DEBS. 57 

became court chaplain to William, and tutor to his 
son. Here his reputation became greater than ever 
as a preacher and a scholar." 

Uytenbogaert was a man of fine personal ap- 
pearance, and his movements combined both per- 
fect grace and dignity. People with whom he 
came in contact were charmed by his wise words 
and superior manners. In his address to the States 
ho set before them "the rights and duties they 
were bound to observe." He showed the inadmis- 
sibility of compulsory support of a symbol, demon- 
strated that the clergy itself had occasioned the 
troubles in the Church, and that the object of the 
Church was to enforce the principles of the inde- 
pendence of the spiritual powers. He demanded 
that '' the State should examine the questions in 
dispute themselves, and bring them to a conclu- 
sion ; and that, in the event of a Synod being 
called, no conclusion should be reached before the 
opposing party should have an opportunity to be 
heard ; and finally, that if fraternity between fac- 
tions could not be obtained, mutual tolerance should 
at least be insured." 

The influence of Uytenbogaert was great, inso- 
much that many who halted about accepting Ar- 
minianism and breaking away from Calvinism, were 
moved to take a decided stand for one or the other. 
His enemies saw and felt his rising powers as a lo- 
gician and ardent advocacy of the primitive doc- 
trine, and greatly feared his influence in the coun- 



58 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS T OR Y. 

cils of the State. In order to prevent his influence 
from reaching to the Netherlands, and break his 
power over them if it did reach them, they invoked 
the aid of the State. When this was brought to 
bear against him, it was not possible even then for 
his enemies to close his mouth, or prevent his work 
for his favorite doctrine. 

Uytenbogaert was anxious, not so much to root 
out Calvinism, as to gain the principle of tolera- 
tion, so that Arminianism might have legal right to 
existence. He was willing that Calvinism should 
live and be, but not on the death of Arminian- 
ism. He seemed to be willing to allow the various 
opinions regarding Christian doctrines to live and 
be advocated as completely as their adherents might 
desire ; but he insisted that there should be such a 
perfect degree of toleration that all the different 
doctrines should have an equal right to public dis- 
cussion, and that the occupants of the pulpits of 
the various sects should be free to preach whatever 
doctrine they believed to be true. Nowhere do we 
find that Uytenbogaert desired to prevent even the 
Roman Catholics from having the fullest opportu- 
nity to present their doctrines, and worship accord- 
ing to their custom. His one watchword was " Tol- 
eration." He argued this when chaplain to an 
embassy to Paris; and when, in 1612, he, with 
Episcopius, held a colloquy with the most rigid 
Calvinists at The Hague, " in the vain hope of se- 
curing peace," legal proceedings were entered against 



ABMINTAN LEADERS. 59 

him because of his interpretation of the Five Points 
of the Remonstrants. His presiding at a Remon- 
strant Synod at Wallevick greatly intensified the 
hostility of his enemies. The storm of persecution 
broke upon him more fiercely than ever, and he re- 
moved to Antwerp in 1622, when the sentence of 
confiscation of property and banishment was pro- 
nounced against him. It became necessary for him 
to go to Rouen, in France, in the vain hope of find- 
ing a safe retreat and rest from the enemies who 
sought to compass his death. He returned secretly 
to Rotterdam in 1626, and was secreted by friends. 
Here he secured counsel, who sought to obtain from 
the court a revocation of the sentence promulgated 
against him and his friends. He succeeded, in 
1629, in obtaining the larger part of his goods, 
which had been confiscated some years before. In 
1631 another act was granted, permitting him to 
reside at The Hague, and ''be present during pub- 
lic worship." He was permitted also to preach a 
few times ; but it is supposed, because of the fear 
still entertained of his wonderful pulpit eloquence, 
he was prohibited from continuing his teaching. A 
strict watch was kept over him, lest he should break 
over bounds and lead the Arminian party to success. 
The Calvinistic party was in the ascendency, had 
absolute control of the Government, and were 
nearly as intolerant as the Romanists had been a 
few years before. The noble and scholarly Uyten- 
bogaert died September 4, 1644, a man of God 



60 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR T. 

and intensely loved by his followers. His name, 
though hard to pronounce, has been almost a talis- 
man and a tower of strength to the Arminians of 
Holland. 

Hugo Geotius. 

Two other great names, Hugo Grotius and John 
Van Olden Barn e veldt, are to be united with Epis- 
copius and Uytenbogaert as defenders and leaders 
in the great Arminian movement — one of the great- 
est of the close of the sixteenth and early part of 
the seventeenth centuries. 

Hugo Grotius was a native of Delft, born April 
10, 1583. So rapid was his progress in learning 
that, when eleven years old, he entered the Uni- 
versity of Leyden, and distinguished himself in 
mathematics, law, and theology. He was able, 
when fourteen years of age, to maintain two theses 
in philosophy with great skill, and also write a 
poem in Latin in honor of King Henry IV, of 
France. This poem was so highly esteemed, that 
when the next year he visited Paris v/ith the Dutch 
embassy, he received an introduction to the king, 
who gave to Grotius a brilliant reception. Grotius 
commenced the practice of law, but devoted a 
large portion of his time to the subject of literature. 
In this line of work he was acute, quick, possessed 
of an excellent judgment, and was industrious. 
Each year he published a new book, or an edition 
of some important work already published to the 
world by a scholar. When appointed a pensioner 



. [ rx2nXTA N L EA DEES. 6 1 

of Rotterdam he refused the office unless it was se- 
cured to him for life, which was granted. In the 
States General, a legislative assemblage, lie met 
Barneveldt, with whom his associations were of the 
pleasantest character, and continued unabated until 
the cruel death of Barneveldt. On visiting Eng- 
land he became associated with Casaubon, a promi- 
nent Romanist, with whom he thought and planned 
a union of the Romanists and Protestants. To this 
project he gave large atteniion and his deepest 
thought, and for a time it seemed to lie very near 
his heart. But finding it utterly impossible to se- 
cure this result, he abandoned his Utopian scheme. 
On returning to HoUand, Grotius gave large atten- 
tion to the docrines of Arminius, more so than ever 
before. He carefully studied Calvinism, with its 
necessitated will, predestination and reprobation, 
and its final perseverance of the saints ; and Ar- 
minianism, with its freedom of will, its salvation by 
grace on the exercise of faith in Jesus Christ, pro- 
vision of salvation for all men, and individual re- 
sponsibility, — and fully adopted a belief in Armin- 
ianism as the only true solution of the problem of 
salvation. He commenced to write for it, and to 
advocate it publicly, and demanded for it the larg- 
est toleration. His great thoughts for toleration, 
for the truth of Arminian doctrine, for freedom of 
the will, for the possibility of the salvation of all 
peo2)le, rang out in words that arrested and de- 
manded attention. His written words were equal 



62 A IiMI^uA^usM in histoe y. 

to his spoken words. Men listened when he spoke, 
and read what he wrote. We have no means at 
present for determining how much the final success 
of Arminianism depended upon his arguments. 

Grotius became one of the strong supporters of 
Arminianism. He was an eloquent disputant. Any 
antagonist found him a foeman worthy of his steel. 
In the latter part of his discussions and writings he 
introduced some novelties in explaining and enforc- 
ing his principles which were not satisfactory to the 
rigid Arminians, nor are they held by the Armin- 
iaus of to-day. However, he was to the last an 
Arminian, and ventured everything upon its altar. 
Having by his persistency gained the ill-will of 
Prince Maurice, he was arrested and placed in the 
Fortress of Loewenstein, which was built at the ex- 
tremity of an island formed by the Maas and the 
Waal. From the authorities his wife had permis- 
sion to remain a part of the time with him in 
prison, but his son was not permitted to come near. 
During the eighteen months of imprisonment his 
great solace was study. He was allowed to have 
books brought in by a vessel, and landed at the 
foot of the fortress, and a large box in which they 
came was taken to his room. This box was filled 
usually with books that were not wanted, and sent 
back to the mainland. On the occasion of sending 
back a box which was pretty large, the guards ex- 
amined it rather carefully, to observe that nothing 
was concealed that was contraband. His wife ob- 



AIi2IIXIAX LEADERS. 63 

served tliiit, after a time, the soldiers became very 
lax in their examinations of the box, which kept 
coming and going on an average of about once a 
week. On one occasion she persuaded her husband 
to get into the box, which he did, and she made it 
fast, when it was carried to the wharf and on board 
the vessel, and to the mainland, where it was 
awaited by friends, who received it very carefully 
and took it to a place of safety, where they took 
Grotius from his confinement in time to save his 
life. After . beins^ secreted in the town for some 
time, he went to France as the best place for safety. 
His wife was retained in prison for a few weeks 
after his flight, and then set at liberty for the rea- 
son that they had no authority for detaining her. 
She soon joined her husband in France. Grotius 
was received quite kindly by King Louis XIV in 
France, who granted him a pension, which was 
not, however, very regularly paid. After many 
changes in fortune, he went to Rostock, and died 
on the 28th of August, 1645. His body was car- 
ried back to Delft, and deposited in the grave of 
his ancestors. His works form a valuable contribu- 
tion to the subject of theology, especially in the 
discussion of the doctrines of Arminianism as com- 
pared with the doctrines of Calvinism. 

JoHx Van Oldex Baexe veldt. 

John Van Olden Barneveldt was one of the il- 
lustrious successors of the great James Arminius, and 



64 A R2II^^IANIS2I IX HIS TOR Y. 

strongly advocated his doctrine as a statesman. He 
Avas a layman, an office-holder, a citizen of great in- 
fluence, used to communion and intercourse with the 
great and cultured ones of earth, and yet never for a 
moment forgot his duties to God and strong adhe- 
rence to Arminianism. For his devotion to the 
cause of Arminianism and toleration, he paid the 
cost with a martyr's death. His life has been ad- 
mirably written by Motley, and I will not repeat it. 

Five Points and Five Articles. 

We are brought, at this point, to the period of 
conflict between the two great systems of doctrine 
before the States of Holland and West Friesiand, 
which occurred in 1610. The representatives of 
these two strong States were assembled in a legal 
Conclave. The Calvinists h<j]d to what was called 
the Five Points: 1st. Unconditional Election; 2d. 
Atonement Limited to the Elect; 3d. Depravity 
Total as to Ability and Merit ; 4th. Effectual Call- 
ing or Irresistible Grace ; 5th. Perseverance of the 
Saints. These in their interpretation embodied the 
objectionable elements of the Calvinistic theory. 
The Arminians laid before this Assembly of Rep- 
resentatives their protest to these Five Points, in 
Five Articles. They were carefully considered by 
the Arminians, were drawn up by Uytenbogaert, 
and signed by forty -five ministers, and received the 
name of Pemonstrance. The Calvinists, realizing 
the force of their statements, and knowing that by 



.1 BMJNT. ! y L EA D E RS. 65 

some means their power must be parried or wholly 
broken, issued a Counter-remonstrance. Here the 
world had two names for the two theological par- 
ties ; namely, the Remonstrants, who were called 
Protestants against Calvinism ; and the Counter- 
Remonstrants, who were the same as the Calvinists, 
or, as they were sometimes called in Holland, the 
Gomarists. 

These Five Articles are worthy of a place in all 
Arminian works of theology ; for they are the 
real foundation of the doctrine, and by them all 
purporting to be Arminianism may be critically 
tried. 

Article I. 

That God, by an eternal, unchangeable purpose 
in Jesus Christ his Son, before the foundation of 
the world, hath determined, out of the fallen, sin- 
ful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ's sake 
and through Christ, those Avho, through the grace 
of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his Son 
Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith, and obe- 
dience of faith, through his grace, even to the end, 
and, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible and 
unbelieving in sin and under wrath, and to con- 
demn them as alienate from Christ, according to 
the word of the Gospel in John iii, 36:' "He that 
believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he 
that believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but 
the wrath of God abideth on him," — and accordino- 
to other passages of Scripture also. 



66 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

Article II. 

That, agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ, the Sa- 
vior of the world, died for all men and for every 
man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his 
death on the cross, redemption and the forgiveness 
of sins ; yet that no one actually enjoys that for- 
giveness of sins except the believer according to the 
word of the Gospel of John iii^ 16 : " God so loved 
the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that 
whosoever believe Lh in him should not perish, but 
have everlasting life ;" and in the First Epistle of 
John ii, 2 : "And he is the propitiation for our sins : 
and not for ours only, but also for the sins of 

the whole world." 

Article III. 

That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of 
the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the 
state of apostasy and sin, can, of and by himself, 
neither think, will, nor do anything that is truly 
good, such as saving faith eminently is ; but that 
it is needful that he be born again of God in Christ 
through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in under- 
standing, inclination or will, and all his powers, 
in order that he may rightly understand, think, 
will, and effect what is truly good, according to tlie 
word of Christ, John xv, 5 : " Without me ye can 

do nothing." 

Article IV. 

That this grace of God is the beginning, con- 
tinuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to 



ARMINIAN LEADERS. ()7 

tliit; extent, that the regeDerate man liimself, with- 
out prevenient or assisting, awakening, following, 
and co-operative grace, can neither think, will, nor 
do good, nor withstand any temptation to evil ; so 
that all good deeds or movements that can be con- 
ceived must be ascribed to the grace of God in 
Christ. But as respects the mode of the operation 
of this grace, it is not irresistible, inasmuch as it 
is written concerning many that they have resisted 
the Holy Ghost — Acts vii, and elsewhere in many 

places. 

Article V. 

That those who are incorporated into Christ by 
a true foith, and have thereby become partakers of 
his life-giving Spirit, have thereby full power to 
strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own 
flesh, and to win the victory, it being understood 
well that it is ever through the assisting grace 
of the Holy Ghost, and that Jesus Christ assists 
them through his Spirit in all temptations, extends 
to them his hand, and if only they are ready for 
the conflict, and desire his help and are not in- 
active, keeps them from falling, so that they, by 
no craft or power of Satan, can be misled nor 
plucked out of Christ's hands, according to the 
word of Christ, John x, 28: "Neither shall any 
man pluck them out of my hand." But whether 
they are capable, through negligence, of forsaking 
again the flrst beginnings of their life in Christ, 
or again returning to this present evil world, of 



68 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR Y. 

turning away from the holy doctrine which was 
delivered thera, of losing a good conscience, of be- 
coming devoid of grace, — that must be more par- 
ticularly determined out of the Holy Scriptures, 
before we ourselves can teach it with the full per- 
suasion of our minds. 

These Articles, thus set fortli and taught, the 
Remonstrants deem agreeable to the Word of 
God, tending to edification, and, as regards this ar- 
gument, sufficient for salvation, so that it is not 
necessary or edifying to rise higher or to descend 
deeper. 

Doctrines Rejected. 

The doctrines rejected by these five Arminian 
propositions before the States Assembly are stated 
as follows : 

1. That God has, before the Fall, and even be- 
fore the creation of men, by an nnchaugeable de- 
cree, foreordained some to eternal life, and others 
to eternal damnation, without any regard to right- 
eousness or sin, to obedience or disobedience, and 
simply because it so pleased him, in order to show 
the glory of his righteousness and his mercy to the 
other. (This is the Supralapsarian view.) 

2. That God, in view of the Fall, and in just 
condemnation of our first parents and their poster- 
ity, ordained to exempt a part of mankind from the 
consequences of the Fall, and to save them by his 
free grace ; but to leave the rest, without regard to 



A i? MI NT A N L EA DEBS 6 9 

age or moral condition, to their condemnation, for 
the glory of his righteousness. (The Sublapsarian 
view.) 

o. That Christ died, not for all men, but only 
for the elect. 

4. That the Holy Ghost works in the elect by 
irresistible grace, so that they must be converted 
and saved ; while the grace necessary and suffi- 
cient for convei-sion, faith, and salvation is with- 
held from the rest, although they are eternally 
called and invited by the revealed will of God. 

5. That those who have received this irresistible 
grace can never totally and finally lose it, but are 
guided and preserved by the same grace to the end. 

" These doctrines, the Remonstrants declare, are 
not contained in the Word of God nor in the Heidel- 
berg Catechism, and ai-e unedifying — yea, danger- 
ous — and should not be preached to Christian 
people." 

In these Five Articles we have set forth election 
and condemnation, conditioned upon the faith or 
unbelief of men ; the atonement, by vicarious or 
expiatory offering, w^as not to be esteemed as lim- 
ited to any definite number, but was made sufficient 
for the salvation of all men ; man, unaided by the 
Holy Spirit, is unable to come to God ; all the in- 
fluences of divine grace can be resisted by all men, 
so that the desire of God for the individual salva- 
tion of a person may be defeated ; and that it was 



70 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

possible for a believer, who lias been in full sym- 
pathy with God and accepted of hina, totally to 
apostatize, and finally fall away and go down to 
eternal damnation. The Remonstrants declared 
these Five Articles to be "in harmony with the 
Word of God, edifying, and, as far as they go, suf- 
ficient for salvation." 

Thus w^ere brought face to face the two great 
systems of doctrines as antagonistic to each other as 
darkness and light ; and upon the issues of these, 
the Calvinists on the one hand, and the Arminians 
on the other, rested their faith. The Calvinists de- 
manded the support of the State, and that there 
should not be toleration of other sentiments ; the 
Arminians demanded that there should be perfect 
toleration, and that the State should not decide the 
one or the other as being true. Calvinism ever 
sought for an alliance with and aid from the State ; 
Arminianism has never sought for an alliance with 
the State, or special aid and defense from the State. 

In the Assembly of representatives of West Hol- 
land and Friesland the vote was overwhelmingly 
against the Arminians. They were banished from 
their places ; many of their ministers went forth 
into the world without any protection whatever. 
" The victory of orthodoxy was obscured," says Dr. 
Schaff, "by the succeeding deposition of about two 
hundred Arminian clergymen, and by the preced- 
ing, though independent, arrest of the political 
leaders of the Remonstrants, at the instigation of 



AJilMNIAX LEADErxS, 71 

Maurice." As we have already seen, Grotius was 
condemned to perpetual imprisonment, but escaped 
and fled to France. That grand old statesman and 
political leader, John of Barne veldt, was unjustly 
condemned to death for alleged high treason, and 
beheaded at The Hague, March 14, 1619, by the 
direction of Prince Maurice. 

"It is greatly to be doubted whether this vic- 
tory gained over the Arminians," says Mosheim, 
" was, upon the whole, advantageous or detrimental 
to the Charch of Geneva in particular, and the 
Reformed Church in general. It is at least certain 
that, after the Synod of Dort, the doctrine of abso- 
lute decrees lost ground from day to day, and its 
patrons were put to the hard necessity of holding 
fraternal communion with those whose doctrine was 
either professedly Arminian, or at least nearly re- 
sembled it. The leaders of the vanquished Armin- 
ians were eminently distinguished for their elo- 
quence, sagacity, and learning ; and being highly 
exasperated by the injurious and oppressive treat- 
ment which they met with in consequence of their 
condemnation, they defended themselves and at- 
tacked their adversaries with such spirit and vigor, 
and also with such dexterity and eloquence, that 
multitudes were persuaded of the justice of their 
cause. It is particularly to be observed that the 
authority of the Synod of Dort was far from being 
universally acknowledged among the Dutch ; the 
provinces of Friesland, Zealand, Utre(;Jit, Guelder- 



72 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS T OR Y. 

land, and Groningen could not be persuaded to 
adopt its decisions; and though, in the year 1651, 
they were at length gained over so far as to inti- 
mate that they would see Avith pleasure the Ke- 
formed religion maintained upon the footing on 
which it had been placed and confirmed by the 
Synod of Dort, yet the most eminent adepts in 
Belgic jurisprudence deny that this intimation had 
the force or character of a law." (Mosheim, Part 
II, Sec. 2, page 605, Edition of Applegate & Co.) 



Chapter IV. 

ARMINIAN WRITERvS. 

Tlie Second Class of Arminian Writers— The Eevolt from 
Calvinism in the Netherlands— Stephen Cnrcellseus — 
Educated at Geneva— How atfected by the Doctrines of 
Arminianism -Visit to the Schools of Helvetia, Turin, 
Basle, and Cologne — Godfrey — Ordained — Preacher at 
Fontainebleau— Removed to Amiens— Refused to sub- 
scribe to the Canons of Dort — Contentions — Poeleii- 
burg's Funeral Oration on Curcella^us — Senate of Ale- 
xia — Ajjpeal to the National Synod — The Articles of the 
National Synod of France - Curcellffius at Amsterdam — 
Successor of Episcopius as Professor of Divinity at Am- 
sterdam— Leaning towards the Grotian View of the 
Atonement — Deatli - Philip Van Limborch — Rela- 
tive of Episcopius — Student at Amsterdam and 
Utrecht— Voetius— Limborch a Professor of Divinity 
at Amsterdam : His Literary Character — Limborch's 
Systematic Theologj^— Kitto's Estimate of Limborch — 
The Remonstrants' College — Its Founding — Episcopius 
the First President— Successors : Curcellseus, Poeleu- 
burg, Limborch, LeClerc, Van Cattenburgh, Wettstein — 
The Remarks of Modern European Writers on Armin- 
ianism — Hagenbach — Van Oosterzee — Treatment of the 
Banished Arminian Preachers — Spies — Calder's Ac- 
count— Naranus — Ryckewart— An Old Patriot abused — 
Troops fired on Arminian Worshipers — Inhuman Treat- 
ment of the Women— A Religious Service held on the 
Ice — The Worshipers came on Skates — The Ice Bird. 

The second class of Arminian writers were 
strong-minded, thoroughly cultured, and courage- 
ous men, who, becoming possessed of the idea that 

73 



74 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

Calvinism was an error and that the doctrines of 
Arminius were tenable, were willing to promnlgate 
that fact to the world at all times. While they did 
not always express themselves in the same terms, 
but by use of different terms seemed to advocate 
some things not held in common, yet when their 
writings are sifted, collated, and compared, there 
is found running through all the same doctrines 
regarding freedom of the will, original sin, cor- 
ruption of the race, and salvation provided so as 
to make it possible for all men, by repentance and 
faith, to come to a knowledge of the truth, and to 
eternal salvation in Jesus Christ. 

The revolt from the doctrine of Calvinism was 
nearly or quite as great in the Netherlands as the 
revolt of Luther and Melanchthon from the Roman 
Catholic Church. The general intelligence was 
much greater among the Calvinists at this time 
than among the Romanists when Luther revolted 
from the system of that Church. The revolt of 
Arminius, Episcopius, and their compeers and suc- 
cessors, was greater, in its intellectual character, 
than that of Luther and Zwingli. In the revolt of 
Luther and Zwingli, they met a denser ignorance 
and a greater amount of impenetrable superstition 
among the Roman Catholics than the Arminiaus 
met when they came in contact with the teachings 
of the Reformers. The fact of the greater intelli- 
gence must be recognized as a factor when we come 
to consider what had to be met and overcome by 



AH MINI AN WPxlTERS. 75 

the Armiiiians in their attempt to obtaiu toleration 
and equal privileges to worship God. 

Let us follow the lives and teachings of some 
of the more prominent successors of Armiuius — the 
men upon whom the burden rested of defending 
these principles — and discover the relations they 
bore to each other in a common conflict, and also 
learn somewhat of the estimate more recent schol- 
ars have placed upon their work. 

Stephanus Curcell.eus. 

Stephauus Curcellieus was a strong and clear 
writer of dogmatic theology on the side of Annin- 
ianism. His voice and pen were heard in antag- 
onism to the rigid and unpalatable doctrines of 
Jolm Calvin. He was born at Geneva, that center 
of Calvinism, April 30, 1586. His fiither was Fir- 
minius Curcellseus, a citizen of Amiens, whose 
death occurred very soon after the birth of his son. 
A brother of Stephanus was an attorney in Amiens, 
and possessed such force of eloquence that he 
"was commonly called ' Chrysostom,' ' tlie Golden- 
mouthed.'" Curcella^us came of an intellectual 
family, which had suffered much in the Roman 
persecutions for the cause of Protestantism. The 
education of Curcellteus Avas begun and carried for- 
ward at Geneva. He entered the " Genevese Stoa," 
and faithfully prosecuted his studies in history, phi- 
losophy, and science. In all of these he made 
rapid and solid progress. Beza, the man who in- 



7 6 ARMINIANIS3I IN HISTOR Y. 

tensified John Calvin's spirit, was his first teacher 
in theology, and we need not doubt that he heard 
and received predestination of the strongest char- 
acter. He remained at Geneva for a number of 
years, enjoying the excellent opportunity for study 
and culture, and well improved his time. In the 
independent air of that grand Genevan city there 
was something that thrilled his heart and stirred 
his mind to recognize the greatness of God's pro- 
visions for human salvation, and the right of tol- 
eration in matters of religion. Feeling the need 
for a broader view cf the world of letters, he re- 
ceived from his Genevan instructors a strong letter 
of commendatioti, in which they spoke of his great 
talents, which were of no inferior order, and the 
prospect that, under the blessing of God, great 
fruits would result to the world from the use of 
such talents. Armed with this excellent letter he 
started upon his European travels. He visited the 
academies of Helvetia, Turin, Basle, and Cologne, 
remaining at each for a season, that he might 
learn the peculiarities and excellencies of each. 
After this he went to Heidelberg, 'where he re- 
mained a longer time, and became intimately ac- 
quainted with the justly celebrated Dionysius God- 
frey, "professor juris," of whose'learning and lectures 
he speaks in the highest terms. By this means 
Curcellseus brought into close connection the Re- 
formed and the Lutheran theology. These he 
studied in parallel columns, and, being of an inde- 



ARMINIAN WRITERS. 77 

pendent cast of mind, he drew his own conclusions 
as to the Scripturalness and reasonableness of each. 
It is possible, though not definitely known, that it 
was in this comparison that his great change of 
mind occurred, in which he determined ultimately 
to abandon his faith in a limited provision for sal- 
vation, and turn to a universal provision of salva- 
tion in Jesus Christ. 

Having returned to France in 1614, he was or- 
dained a minister and placed in charge of Fon- 
tainebleau, a small but intelligent congregation, 
which grew quite rapidly under his careful minis- 
trations. Often the King of France was found in 
his congregation, with many of his courtiers; for he 
loved to visit this, the place of his birth and his 
early home. The influence of Curcellseus in mat- 
ters of religion and faith grew continually, and the 
circle of his power widened. The revolt from Cal- 
vinism had begun, and as his mind rested upon 
the provisions for salvation, and he analyzed care- 
fully the Word of God, and saw that in the teach- 
ing of the Divine Mind there was the recognition 
of the principle of reasonableness, the greater the 
revolt in his mind, and the wider became the breach 
between him and Calvinism. Rigid predestination 
and a necessitated will, and a declaration that all 
men were guilty of Adam's sin, found but little 
upon which to rest as a sure basis when he came 
to examine the Word of God. 

When he removed to Amiens in 1621, and be- 
6 



78 ARMINIANJSM IN HISTORY. 

came the pastor, he refused ''to subscribe to the 
Canons of Dort." The Calvinists, who were in 
the ascendency, compelled him to resign his charge. 
His friends, who greatly prized his words of wis- 
dom and eloquent addresses, interceded with him 
until he consented to assent to a modified form of 
the Creed of Dort. This having been accomplished, 
he became pastor at Verres, in Piedmont, in which 
Church he exercised his office until 1634. 

The mind of Curcellseus was active in an effort 
to stand by the Creed of Calvin, and so please 
some of his warm personal friends ; but the inner 
revolt of his heart continued. " The doctrine of ab- 
solute predestination" filled his thoughts and har- 
assed his soul with doubts and fears, until he found 
that he could not continue in a Church where he 
must advocate such a doctrine. Turning his back 
upon his home and the places he loved in the Re- 
formed Church, he proceeded to Amsterdam, and 
cast his lot with the Remonstrants. His learning, 
candor, and gentleness gave him reputation among 
the Amsterdam Remonstrants and the professors in 
the college. 

That we may have a clear idea of how this the- 
ologian had to contend for his convictions regarding 
Arminianism, as also how other Remonstrants were 
persecuted and constantly annoyed by the intense 
and dogmatic Reformed, I will quote a passage from 
Arnold Poelenburg's "Funeral Oration upon Ste- 
phen Curcellseus." "When this reverent man was 



ARMINIAN WRITERS 79 

installed pastor of the Church at AmieDS, about the 
year 1621," says Poelenburg, *'the dispute concern- 
ing the five controverted points on predestination 
was raging, and had extended itself even to the 
neighboring nations ; but although the Synod of 
Dort decided these controversies according to the 
wishes of our adversaries — of whom, indeed, it 
consisted — yet the flame of the quarrel was not 
quenched, but it blazed more furiously even than 
before. In Belgium, after this decision had been 
made, it came so far within the limits of modera- 
tion (if, indeed, it could be called moderation) 
that unless any one would submit to the Canons of 
Dort, he could not remain in discharge of his duties 
and office ; but in France (whence no one had been 
sent to the Synod, the king having forbidden this) 
the matter proceeded so far that an oath was pre- 
scribed in support of the Canons established at 
Dort. This decree was given in the Senate at Ale- 
sia, Peter Molinseus, the president, especially urg- 
ing it, lest, indeed, his anatomy of Arminianism 
should have to undergo a new anatomizing. Such 
a decree, so very cruel and most atrocious, I think, 
from the first days of Christianity to the present 
time, never was found or known ; for not only did 
the Judgment of Dort establish a rule of faith, but 
it also bound, by a very sacred oath, the consciences 
of the pastors to a promise, given in their own 
handwriting, to recognize these Canons of Dort as 
divine, and true, and abiding, even to the last mo- 



80 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

ment of tiieir lives. To this decree, which was en- 
acted in a National Synod in the year 1620, not 
only Curcellseus, at Amiens, and David Blondellus, 
then the pastor of the Church at Honda, afterward 
the professor of Ecclesiastical History at Amster- 
dam, but all the ministers of that diocese, rendered 
earnest opposition. Here, indeed, this solemn cere- 
mony of an oath was abolished ; but in the follow- 
ing year, in another provincial Synod, a new in- 
strument was formed, by which all were constrained 
to receive the faith of the Canons, but without the 
taking of an oath. Curcellseus, perceiving that our 
opinion would be rejected, which he had not yet 
submitted to the test of Scripture, and that the Ke- 
monstrants would be condemned as guilty of schism, 
whom he believed to be the least worthy of this 
accusation, and that conscience would be bound by 
the establishment of men when it belonged to God 
alone, declared himself unable by hand or mind to 
yield assent to it ; and soon after he resigned his 
office, appealing to the National Synod, soon to be 
celebrated at Charenton, which he did by the advice 
of his friends and relations, influenced by some 
trickery in the Synod, who threatened that, unless 
he should do this of his own free will, the Synod 
would brand him with the severer mark of igno- 
miny. But when this Synod was held, affairs were 
grievously disturbed in this our Belgium ; neither 
was there a place of refuge, either by sea or land, 
or a gleaming hope of happier times. Some like- 



A R. MINI AN WRITERS. 81 

-wise instilled a doubt in his mind concerning the 
foreknowledge of God, upon which he was not en- 
tirely settled, and from which stronghold they were 
attempting to overthrow the idea of God's predes- 
tination. His relations, friends, and advisers, with 
other importunate interferers, added their influence, 
and urged his wavering and doubtful mind that he 
should surrender his own conscience with his own 
handwriting, into servitude to certain sacred Can- 
ons, but with these reservations in the conditions : 
1. That he should not be held as condemning the 
Remonstrants, an act to which he expressed him- 
self very averse ; 2. That he could not wholly 
approve these Canons, in which our opinion was 
rejected. The remaining ones, which they called af- 
firmative, in which their opinion was expressed, he 
could not be held to approve in the same sense as 
the partisans of Dort ; for the Synod having omittted 
the former, published the latter under the title, 
'Articles adopted at the National Synod of the Re- 
formed Church of France, held at Charenton — 
printed at Paris.' Finally, he declared that from 
Canon XV, chapter i, it seemed that God is the 
author of sin." (Methodist Quarterly Review, 1863, 
pp. 103, 104.) 

At Amsterdam, Curcellseus became an intimate 
friend of Simon Episcopius. He was as a "brother 
beloved." On the death of Episcopius, he became 
his successor as professor of Divinity in Amsterdam 
College. In this office he was unusually successful. 



82 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

His great mind was able to use the rich stores of 
information it had gathered in past years, and 
pour this out in a copious, ever-flowing stream for 
the instruction and edification of the many students 
who assembled in that honorable city. His teach- 
ing was recognized by the Calvinists as unanswer- 
able, and by the Remonstrants as a strong intrench- 
ment of their doctrines. While, on the doctrine of 
the character of the atonement, he leaned some- 
what to the Grotian view, yet he set a special 
"emphasis upon the sacrificial character of the 
death of Christ in its reference to God as well as to 
man, asserting that Christ made satisfaction for sin, 
but not by enduring the whole punishment due to 
sinners," Ctircellseus held steadily to the one great 
thought of the freedom of the will and an unlim- 
ited atonement. He sought for and advocated tol- 
eration. While he was reared and educated in the 
hot-bed of anti-toleration he perceived very clearly 
the nature of human rights, the character of God's 
teachings, individual responsibility, and the circum- 
stanstances under which the highest intellectual and 
spiritual results would follow, and he adopted and 
advocated the doctrine of the freest toleration of 
all sects. 

When the death-hour came, in 1659, he ex- 
claimed: "My God, my Father! for this hoar all 
things are well. I am calmly composed — I am ex- 
ultant !" Thus this great Remonstrant teacher 
passed away. 



A B MINI AN WHITE RS. 83 



Kemonstrants' College at Amsterdam. 

It may not be amiss to speak of the Remon- 
strants' College in Amsterdam, founded in 1634 by 
the action and sacrificing of the Remonstrants. Si- 
mon Episcopius was called from Rotterdam to act 
as Divinity professor. His lectures to the stu- 
dents were published, after his death, under the 
title of ''Theological Institutes." The principles 
upon which Episcopius lectured are well stated in 
his Memoirs : '*In this work he not only proposed 
to investigate the truth of every Christian doctrine, 
but also to ascertain its importance. This he did 
with a design of preparing the way for exhibiting 
the common ground on which the peace and unity 
of the Christian Church might be founded. The- 
ologians in general are accustomed to hold it to 
be sufficient to demonstrate the truth of their doc- 
trines, and prove the falsehood or heterodoxy of 
others, merely for the purpose of showing why they 
ought not to separate from the parties whose opin- 
ions do not accord with their own. Episcopius 
thought differently, and asserted that it was pos- 
sible for divines and Christians to have a diversity 
of opinions and yet hold Church fellowship, or, at 
least, to cultivate friendly intercourse with each 
other. This he attempted to prove by showing that 
the points debated among orthodox Christians were 
not such as to place the party who maintained an 
opinion opposite to the other in a situation that 



84 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

might eodanger his safety ; but, on the contrary, 
holding and publicly confessing all the great points 
of truth necessary to salvation, they were bound 
by the dictates of Christianity to cherish the prin- 
ciples of concord and brotherly affection." (Me- 
moirs of Simon Episcopius, pp. 423, 424.) 

The gentle spirit of Episcopius manifested it- 
self in his great desire to bring all people profess- 
ing Christianity into the spirit of friendship and 
union. While preparing his work and giving it to 
his classes and to the world, this grand object was 
never lost sight of for a moment. "In endeavor- 
ing to effect this, he first examined a doctrinal 
point, to determine its character. This prepared 
the way for him to show how far there must be an 
agreement of opinion upon it in order to maintain 
union and fellowship, and, by consequence, to what 
extent diversity of sentiment might be allowed be- 
fore the great bonds of union should be broken 
down, and a person be pronounced unsuitable for 
Christian communion. It was his design to bring 
to this trial every doctrinal subject, in order to 
show that all those who separated from the Church 
of Rome, and maintained orthodox principles, 
might agree upon the great and weighty doctrines 
of our common Christianity." (Memoirs, p. 424.) 

The line of successors in the professorship of Di- 
vinity at Amsterdam is worthy of record and study. 
Simon Episcopius, Stephanus Curcellseus, Arnold 
Poelenburg, Philip Limborch, John LeClerc, Adrian 



ARMINIAN WRITERS. 85 

Van Cattenburgh, John James Wettstein, follow in 
a line of succession as glorious in its character and as 
religious in its spirit as it was high and exalted in its 
intellectual character. These were men of great 
culture, strong common sense, high natural ability, 
and intensity of purpose. They were not mediocres 
in any sense whatever, but men of brain, heart, 
conscience, and conviction. They were men who 
held constant communion with heaven, and lived 
under the influences of the Holy Spirit. Such men 
left their sensible impress upon the great revolt 
from Calvinism which took its form from Armin- 
ianism. Long may their memory live, and their 
deeds and doctrines be held in the highest esteem ! 

Modern Writers and Arminianism. 

How have modern European and other writers 
esteemed Arminianism and its influence ? Schleier- 
macher has used this language: ''The Arminian 
principle, which renounced the authority of the sym- 
bolical books, gave such an impulse to exegetical in- 
vestigation, to independent hermeneutical labors, 
and to the speculative treatment of theology, that, 
in consequence of the influence exerted by the 
works of Episcopius and Hugo Grotius, it was in- 
troduced into the whole Evangelical Church. Thus 
a general desire manifested itself in the Protestant 
Church of Germany to do away with the authority 
of the symbolical books." (From Hagenbach, Vol. 
H, p. 216.) 



Ob ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

Within the ranks of Calvinism have been many 
who revolted at the harsh doctrines of iron-bound 
decrees. "As early as the lifetime of Calvin him- 
self," says Hagenbach, "Sebastian Castello and Ge- 
rome Bolsec, both of Geneva, raised their voices 
against the Calvinistic docrine, but did not produce 
any impression. The more moderate view of Ar- 
minius and his followers always had secret adher- 
ents in the Reformed Church itself." (Hagenbach, 
paragraph 250.) 

In speaking of some of the peculiarities of Ar- 
minianism, Winer says : " The Arminians supposed 
a constant co-operation of the human will, awak- 
ened by Divine grace, with that grace ; but, in their 
opinion, the influence of the latter is by no means 
merely of a moral nature. It is the power of the 
Holy Spirit accompanying the Word of God which 
exerts an influence upon the mind and is super- 
natural as regards its nature, but analogous to the 
natural power of all truth as regards the mode of 
its operation." (Quoted by Hagenbach, Sec. 249.) 

Van Oosterzee has these words in reference to 
Arminianism: " We find at this period the study 
of dogmatics carried on by the Arminians from their 
standpoint with much zeal and skill. Among the 
dogmatists of this school stand out in particular 
Episcopius, Curcellseus, and Philip Limborch, whose 
theology has not incorrectly gained the renown of 
being Biblical, irenical, and practical. We see 
these men, while relatively free from scholasticism, 



ARMINIAN WRITERS. 87 

tread a more exegetical path, guided by the light 
of Hugo Grotius, their most distinguished apolo- 
gist and commentator. Even where we can not ad- 
mit their premises, we can hardly deny that their 
method is far superior to that of many other con- 
temporaries. We must, at least, call it unjust to 
name them, as has often been done, in the same 
breath as the Socinians, though we can not deny 
that at least their later representatives have been 
also the forerunners of rationalism." (Van Ooster- 
zee's Christian Dogmatics, p. 42.) 

Treatment of Banished Preachers. 

The treatment received by the banished preach- 
ers of the Netherlands, who were driven out by the 
action of the Synod of Dort when they repudiated 
Arminianism, and the treatment which their families 
received from the same source, and the meek and 
kindly spirit in which it was met and endured by 
these Remonstrants, are evidences of the intolerant 
character of the Reformed, and the gentler spirit 
of the Arminians. It was decided that whatever 
banished minister returned should be seized and 
imprisoned, or banished again, without the oppor- 
tunity of ever visiting his beloved home. He must 
wander an exile on the face of the earth, and die 
unloved and unrespected. Spies were paid for 
hunting down those who were suspected of return- 
ing to their homes. Large rewards were given to 
individuals who detected persons, either in allowing 



« ARM1NIANIS3I IN BIST OR Y. 

public services to be held in their houses, or those 
who were present at such assemblies, or found in 
any way by their public conduct to sanction the 
cause of Arminianism. '' One proclamation fol- 
io w'ed another," says Calder, "each more severe 
than the last, imposing fines upon those who dared 
to meet for such a purpose, while to harbor an 
Arminian minister, or show him any act of kind- 
ness, or suffer him to perform any religious duty 
in a family, to pray with a dying person, exposed 
the hSad of it to the heaviest fines, and such min- 
isters to imprisonment or banishment. Persons 
known either to collect or contribute money to the 
support of the deprived or banished ministers were 
visited with the heaviest penalties." 

"The wife of N^ranus, an Arminian clergy- 
man, when dying, petitioued the magistrates of the 
city to allow her husband to come and visit her be- 
fore her death, which was refused. This occasioned 
spies to be constantly around her house, and even 
to get up to the window^s to look into the dying 
woman's room, supposing that if her husband heard 
of her state, his affection would prompt him at all 
risk to come to her bedside. But he was unac- 
quainted with her condition, and therefore they 
were disappointed." 

" Kyckewart, one of the cited ministers who 
was banished, having got to hear that his wdfe was 
dying, and that her request to allow him to visit 
her was not granted, hastened to see her, though he 



ARMINIAN WRITERS. ■ 89 

made himself liable to perpetual imprisonment by 
returning into Holland, and, after traveling to the 
place where she resided, got some friend to put him 
into a very large basket or wicker hamper, and 
carry him in open day to her house, where he 
staid with her till she died." (Memoirs of Epis- 
copius, p. 363.) 

"A venerable man, an inhabitant of Leyden, 
who was detected in allowing a meeting to be held 
in his house, and in contributing to the support of 
the exiled Remonstrant ministers, was summoned 
before the magistrates, banished the town, and con- 
demned in a fine of one thousand gold reals for 
suffering this meeting to be held ; then in six hun- 
dred guilders for collecting money for the ministers, 
and twenty-five more for refusing to declare the 
names of those who were present at the meeting. 
This man, it should be understood, had long been 
attached to the doctrines of Arminius, and so early 
as 1574, when the town of Leyden was besieged by 
the Spaniards, he was one of those who, on that oc- 
casion, not only took part with his fellow-citizens 
in that display of courage and endurance of suffer- 
ing, of which nothing in the annals of modern his- 
tory furnishes any parallel, but also rendered other 
essential services in the defense of the city, through- 
out the whole of the trying period of the siege." 
(Calder, p. 364.) 

The stories told by creditable historians of the 
savagery of these times are almost beyond ere- 



90 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

dence. Some of them rival the atrocities of a few 
years before, when Spanish Catholics, under Alva 
and his minions, fired upon the defenseless Protest- 
ants, beat out the brains of many, piked, hung, 
and burned others. The Counter-Remonstrant 
party hated, hunted, and destroyed the peaceful 
men of the Remonstrant party. Calvinist Protest- 
ants were destroying Arminian Protestants. 

Persecution can not always put a stop to the 
preaching of a pure gospel and the growth of the 
Church. This was true in Holland. "Although the 
Arminians were prohibited holding public worship, 
nevertheless, unawed by the threatened severity of 
the proclamations, they held their religious meet- 
ings," says one of the writers, " throughout the 
whole of the United Provinces, and especially in 
Holland. They were held in towns and villages, in 
houses and barns, in garrets and cellars, in fields 
and highways, in streets and gardens. This con- 
tumacy, as it was called, was highly offensive to 
the bigoted Counter-Remonstrant magistrates and 
clergy ; and Maurice, though he did not assume the 
name of sovereign after Barneveldt's assassination, 
was as absolute in his dictum as any Eastern despot, 
and, at the request of the magistrates he had 
created in the place of the Remonstrants, sent 
troops to enable them to suppress these assemblies. 
The reader may judge of the strength of the Ar- 
minians in Rotterdam, when he is informed that the 
first time they held a meeting, in a field some few 



ARMINIAN WRITERS. 91 

miles from the town, not less than five thousand of 
them assembled to hear preaching. The Calvinist 
party were enraged at this, and determined to take 
vengeance the next Sunday. After keeping the 
gates of the city closed to a period far beyond the 
usual hour, two troops of English and Scotch sol- 
diers were led out to disperse about two thousand 
persons who had met to hear a sermon, on which 
occasion they fired upon the people. Some were 
killed, and others received serious wounds, of which 
they afterwards died. Several gentlemen, with the 
muzzles of the soldiers pointed at their breasts, 
were robbed of their purses, the ladies stripped of 
their jewels and rings, while others were treated in 
a way not to be named ; and what forms the dark- 
est picture of the scene, was the fact of some of 
the Calvinistic clergy viewing it from the tops of 
their churches by the aid of their perspective 
glasses, and wantonly enjoying these deeds of blood 
and slaughter." (Memoirs of Episcopius, pp. 
367-368.) 

These courageous Christians, followers of the 
doctrines of Arminius, who was only restoring the 
apostolical faith, found ways of eluding the cruel 
persecutors, and enjoying a season of refreshing 
worship. ' ' Toward the latter end of the year, in 
consequence of the usual rains which fell at that 
season, the people were prevented from holding 
their meetings in the fields, but as soon as the frost 
set in, they took their skates, and in vast numbers 



92 A RMINIANISM IN HI8T0R Y. 

flew to some distance, and celebrated divine wor- 
ship on the ice uninterrupted, for no civil officer or 
soldier could overtake any number of persons thus 
provided with the means of escape over a vast ex- 
tent of country, submerged in water, which was 
frozen over at this period of the year. Here the 
people joyfully and undisturbed sang their psalms, 
and listened with attention to their minister's ser- 
mon, after which a certain number of them always 
accompanied him on their skates to his home. One 
of these engaged in this service was a favorite with 
the people, and went by the name of "The Ice 
Bird." The magistrates, in order to bring contempt 
on the labors of these devoted pastors, called their 
field-preaching "Hedge Sermons." (Memoirs of 
Episcopius, pp. 370-371.) 

God seemed to have a great work for these 
sturdy Dutch Arminians to perform, and when 
their way seemed hedged up he opened new ways, 
and gave them the courage of the martyrs. 



Chapter V. 

DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 

Vigilant Enemies of Arminianism — Theodore Beza — Theo- 
logical Conditions at the Time of the Controversy — Cal- 
A'inlsm Supreme in the Eeformed Church — A Standing 
Menace to Rome — Predestination before Augustine — 
New Testament Idea of Predestination — Pelagius, the 
Monk of Wales — Met Augustine at Hippo — Augustine — 
Gottschalk — Luther and Melanchthon repudiated Pre- 
destination — John Calvin — Calvin's Master Works — 
Zwingli — The Genius of Calvin — Students went to Ge- 
neva to study — Modification in Calvinism — Doctrine as 
taught by Arminius — Statements of Dr. W. F. Warren — 
Quotations from the Works of Arminius — First Aspect 
of Predestination — Reasons for rejecting Calvinism — 
Second Aspect of Supralapsarianism — Reasons against 
it— Third Phase, or Sublapsarianism — Reasons against 
it — Watson's Teaching — Some made a Cloak of Armin- 
ianism to teach Heretical Doctrines — Arminianism in 
Contact with Socinianism — Arminianism in Contact with 
Pelagianism — Arminianism holds to a Trinity — Value 
of Arminianism to the World — Dr. Copleston's View of 
Arminianism. 

When the principles advocated by James Ar- 
minius were publicly put forth by him, there were 
vigilant enemies who attacked him in character and 
teachings, denouncing him in bitter terms, and the 
controversy was of an exceedingly stirring charac- 
ter. From Geneva, Theodore Beza, upon whose 
shoulders the mantle of Calvin had fallen, sent his 
7 93 



94 ARMINIA NISM IN HISTOR Y. 

protest and disputants to meet and counteract, as 
far as possible, the work of Arminius and his fol- 
lowers. Gomarus a professor of Theology at Ley- 
den, and companion in labor with Arminius, was 
especially active and bitter in his attacks upon the 
man and his teachings. All the force of argument, 
the plea for age and venerableness of Calvinism, 
and the influence of State authority was brought to 
bear against the apostle of salvation possible for all 
men. But Arminius stood firm, grounded in the 
well-known principles adopted by him when fully 
convinced by the writings of Koornhert. 

Historical Keview of Theological Conditions. 

I. The theological conditions before and at the 
time of the controversy prepared the way for Armini- 
anism. 

Calvinism reigned supreme in the Reformed 
Church. It had, by its own force, been able to 
rally around itself a large number of followers, un- 
til a Church was founded whose object was to 
advocate the principles of Calvinism, and stand 
against the encroachments, aggressive efforts, and 
tyranny of Komanism. Geneva and other Swiss can- 
tons were fully under the domination of Calvinism. 
Somewhat feebly her authority was felt in France. 
Along the water-way of the lower Rhine into the 
Netherlands, her power was more fully felt and 
authority recognized. She had leaped the North 
Sea and made a home in Scotland, and was reach- 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 95 

ing down to take in the English heart. Every- 
where Calvinism was a standing menace to Rome, 
and kept in check her unholy ambition. In this 
respect she is worthy of the highest praise from all 
Protestantism. Her many Creeds and Confessions 
of Faith were sturdy blows against the mother of 
harlots, and demonstrated to the world that the Re- 
formed faith was gaining ascendency. Pelagianism 
had never founded a denomination or society, but 
infested portions of the Roman Catholic Church, 
and was beginning to find its way into the Reformed 
Church, whose influence could negative its teach- 
ings as far as possible. Socinus had, by the force 
of his eloquence, carried away, especially in Poland 
and Hungary, several societies from the Roman 
Church, and had founded some new societies which 
held and advocated his doctrines. His system was 
skillfully stated, and his adherents carried on the 
work with a degree of success, but they lacked the 
enthusiasm and consistency of both the Lutheran 
and Reformed Churches. 

1. "Before the time of Augustine, the unani- 
mous doctrine of the Church Fathers, so far as 
scientifically developed at all, was that the Divine 
decrees as to the fate of the individual men were 
conditioned upon their faith and obedience as fore- 
seen in the Divine Mind. In the first ministry of 
Augustine he hinted at nothing else. Man's faith 
and obedience in Jesus Christ were accepted by the 
Father, and the sinner was justified." Such was 



96 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

the New Testament doctrine in which " is a remark- 
able anticipation of the modern controversy." * In 
Paul's Epistle to the Komans," says Pope, "the 
apostle to the Gentiles argues against these advo- 
cates of an unconditional election, these earliest 
perverters of the true doctrine of the decretive 
will of God. It must be always remembered that 
this was the object with which he wrote the three 
chapters in which the Predestinarians have taken 
refuge; they were written, in fact, as a proleptical 
refutation of such views. ... St. Paul admits . . . 
that the ancient election was of a particular line, 
through which the revelation of the preparatory 
Gospel was to be transmitted, and in which the 
author of that Gospel was to appear. Undoubtedly 
it is hard for human reason to distinguish between 
the national and individual election, and between 
the active and persuasive will of God, in the harden- 
ing of evil men ; but the distinction must be made." 
(Pope, Vol. II, p. 348.) The entire early Church, 
from Paul to Augustine, "knew in its doctrine no 
other election and predestination than what was 
conditional." The eloquent Chrysostom said: "Not 
of love alone, but of our virtue also. If it sprang 
of love alone, all would have been saved. If from 
our virtue alone, that would be little, and all would 
be lost. It was from neither alone, but from both ; 
for the calling was not of necessity or of force." 
(Pope, Vol. II, page 349.) 

2. Pelagius, the Monk of Wales, wandered 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 97 

from England to the Continent, thence to Northern 
Italy, and finally down to Rome. He had become 
filled with the idea that man had sufficient moral 
power, when exercised, to enable him to please God, 
receive forgiveness for whatever sins he might com- 
mit, and enable him to live in a state of innocent 
purity, and at last enter the kingdom of heaven. 
In this system no Christ's atoning sacrifice was 
needed. Pelagius wandered over to Africa, and 
came to Hippo, where Augustine was bishop. 
Very soon the controversy between Augustine and 
Pelagius opened, and was carried forward with great 
spirit. 

3. Augustine, seeing that Pelagius gave no 
honor or credit to the grace of God in Jesus Christ 
for human salvation, and believing that Pelagius 
thereby wholly ignored both the necessity for and 
fact of a Christ as a sacrifice and mediator, ' ' with 
a view to enhance the glory of grace," said unequiv- 
ocally, "that the salvation of the elect depends 
upon the bare will of God, and that his decree to save 
those whom he chooses to save is unconditional." The 
inflexible principle advocated by Augustine was, 
" Predestination is the preparation of grace ; grace 
the bestowment itself." His whole system radiated 
from this. 

4. Gottschalk, about 840 A. D., taught the un- 
conditional reprobation or unconditional predesti- 
nation of the uncalled and unsaved. He completed 
what Augustine left out, to make a system that 



98 AR MINI ANISM IN HISTORY. 

should be complete on that basis. The dogma of 
Gottschalk was repudiated at Mainz (A. D. 848) ; 
at Valence (A. D. 855), it received approval. 
'* On the side of Gottschalk was Ratramnus ; against 
him Hinckmar. It may be said that, throughout 
the mediaeval discussions of this and kindred sub- 
jects, the tendency was in a direction opposite to 
that of predestinarianism ; and, moreover, that 
the ever-growing theory of a kingdom of ^Christ, 
under one vicar, predestined to embrace the world, 
was itself unfavorable to any limitations of the gos- 
pel vocation. The mediaeval Church, at the worst, 
was in spirit and practice missionary. Unions of 
missions and a partial call can never rationally co- 
exist." (Pope, Vol. II, p. 351.) Where these two 
theories, that of Augustine and that of Gottschalk, 
are joined in one, as they were by John Calvin, we 
have all the elements and the essence of Calvinism. 
When men have embraced this theory as the only 
solution of the problem of will and of salvation, 
they will encompass sea and land to advocate their 
doctrine, and plant their principles to live forever. 
5-. Luther and Melanchthon, when they first 
entered upon the Reformation of Germany, ac- 
cepted the Augustine theory. It was not long be- 
fore they discovered that, accepting Augustine's pre- 
destination to salvation of a portion of mankind 
unconditionally, required that they should also accept 
Gottschalk's predestination of the other portion of 
mankind to eternal perdition unconditionally. These 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 99 

two liberal-minded men, whose hearts yearned for 
the salvation of their fellow-men and for the com- 
plete elevation of their loved Germany, started 
back with horror from such a conclusion, and 
returned to the *' primitive doctrine of conditional 
election." Melanchthon, more radically than Luther, 
stood for the primitive thought and against uncon- 
ditional predestination. The Lutherans generally 
follow Melanchthon. 

6. John Calvin, at Geneva, taught in the strong- 
est terms " unconditional election and reprobation," 
and built his entire theological system upon this as 
a basis. His master-work, *' Institutes of Chris- 
tian Keligion," is a monument to his great mind 
and wonderful industry, at the same time serving 
to intensify the wonder why so great a mind could 
have been led into so great an error. He who en- 
dured such persecutions as fell to Calvin's lot in 
Paris and France, and whose great heart yearned 
for the salvation of his French people, one would 
have supposed, must have desired a greater breadth of 
freedom in the coming to the Lord for salvation than 
is represented in his system. How or why he 
adopted so narrow a plan of salvation, or bounded 
the mercy of God to sinners as he did, is an unex- 
plained problem that the Arminian mind can not 
fathom. " Zwingli and Calvin," says Pope, " united 
in reviving the Augustinian doctrine of an individual 
vocation determined by a predestinating decree ; but 
Calvin has, given a permanent name to the system, 



100 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

because, in fact, he gave it a distinguishing char- 
acter. He laid his foundation deeper than thp.t of 
his forerunner. Augustine made the eternal decree 
his central point ; Calvin carried it up to the Ab- 
solute Being, or Absolute Sovereignty of God, from 
which that decree flowed. ' Man,' said Calvin, ' falls 
by the providence of God so ordaining, but he falls 
through his own wickedness.' All is of the abso- 
lute, unquestionable, despotic Sovereignty of God. 
If human reason suggests a demur, ' Respondendum 
est quia voluit' — It is answered, so he wills. The 
decree was Supralapsarian ; that is, it included the 
Fall, which Augustine never asserts formally. It 
follows from this in the system of Calvin that the 
external call of the gospel is unmeaning ceremo- 
nial, save as to the elect. The word and the means 
of grace are to all others * Signa inania,' the mani- 
festations of a ' Voluntas signi,' which, signifying 
nothing but a common grace, must be distinguished 
from the hidden ' Voluntas beneplaciti,' on which 
the salvation of every man depends. Here is the 
secret of predestinarianism, whatever other name it 
may bear, the secret that links it with fatalism, 
with philosophic determinism, with Pantheism, with 
the modern notion of abstract law, or the abso- 
lute fiat of a being who is not so much a person 
as a will. Other relations of this creed to theo- 
logical doctrine, subordinate relations introduced in 
due course, all find their vanishing point in this 
Unconditional and Unconditioned Sovereignty, 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 101 

which is the foundation and topstone of the whole 
superstructure." (Pope, Vol. II, pp. 351-352.) 

Modifications in Calvinism. 

Modifications in Calvinism have occurred in all 
lands and ages, wherever it has traveled. In France 
Amyraldus revolted, and was forced to teach that, 
in providing salvation, God made provisions for all 
men, but he elected to give to a limited number 
the "grace of repentance and faith," and left the 
rest without any determining influence. Richard 
Baxter taught the same in England. The same 
was heard in Scotland. Even Calvin himself fore- 
saw the revolt from his predestination theory, and 
sought to deter men from it. It is the same spirit 
of revolt that within the past decade set Calvinism 
to seek a change in the Creed. 

The genius of Calvin made his doctrine felt far 
and wide. The men who rallied around his stan- 
dard labored hard to intensify it. That most re- 
markable man, Theodore Beza, was his coadjutor and 
successor in theological training. This man of the 
Reformation was of a strong and logical mind, and, 
having adopted Calvin's notions and thoroughly 
made them his own, put forth all his powers to 
maintain them. From 1564, when Calvin died, and 
Beza succeeded to all his offices, there was no lack 
of strong and vigorous arguments in favor of Cal- 
vinism. Beza, if so it could be, was a stronger 
Calvinist than Calvin. Calvinism spread into the 



102 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

Netherlands, and students went from these northern 
countries down to Geneva for their theological stud- 
ies with Beza. He did not fail to indoctrinate them 
soundly and thoroughly. James Arminius and 
Uytenbogaert received their training under this in- 
domitable master, Beza. " But they revolted, and 
Arminius stood as the great champion of the bet- 
ter, clearer, happier interpretation of God's purpose 
and plan in human salvation. 

II. The doctrine as taught by Arminius was 'Hhe 
result of long, calm, and patient study of the Scrip- 
tures" and its statement was a clear, fidl, and forcible 
answer to predestination as taught by Augustine, Gott- 
schalk, Calvin, and Beza. 

The state of the controversy is well put by Dr. 
W. F. Warren: "The great error which he [Ar- 
minius] had to combat, consisted in making the Di- 
vine efficiency with relation to one temporal phe- 
nomenon — viz., the readjustment of the disturbed 
relation of God and the sinner — an exception, mak- 
ing the action of the Divine efficiency to that phe- 
nomenon essentially unlike in relation to any other 
temporal phenomenon in the universe. The Church 
had held that every exercise of the Divine effi- 
ciency in relation to temporal phenomena, was sub- 
jectively conditioned by Divine wisdom, omnis- 
cience, and goodness. Calvinism, on the other hand, 
maintained that this particular exercise of Divine 
efficiency was absolutely unconditioned, and was 
grounded solely upon the arbitrary good pleasure of 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 103 

God. The refutation of this error, and the re-es- 
tablishment of the opposite view, was the mission of 
James Arminius." (Meth. Quart. Rev., July, 1857, 
p. 350.) 

Words of Arminius. 

It is profitable to quote from the works of Ar- 
minius. When Arminius " was before the States 
of Holland, at^The Hague, on the 30th of October, 
1608," he gave to that honorable body a clear state- 
ment of his teachings regarding predestinatiou , as 
well as other features of Calvinism. After he had 
clearly stated the doctrine of predestination in 
terms largely taken from Calvinistic writings, he 
proceeded to analyze the subject, and set forth 
their Calvinism under three forms. The first was 
as follows : 

"1. That God has absolutely and precisely de- 
creed to save certain particular men by his mercy 
or grace, but to condemn others by his justice ; and 
to do all this without having any regard in such a 
decree to righteousness or sin, obedience or disobe- 
dience, which could possibly exist on the part of one 
class of men or of the other. 

" 2. That, for the execution of the preceding 
decree, God determined to create Adam, and all 
men in him, in an upright state of original right- 
eousness, besides which he also ordained them to 
commit sin, that they might thus become guilty of 
eternal condemnation, and be deprived of original 
righteousness. 



104 ARBIINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

" 3. That those persons whom God has thus 
positively willed to save, he has decreed not only 
to salvation, but also the means which pertain to 
it (that is, to conduct and bring them to faith in 
Christ Jesus, and to perseverance in that faith) ; and 
that he also in reality leads them to these results by 
a grace and power that are irresistible, so that it is 
not possible for them to do otherwise than to believe, 
persevere in faith, and be saved. 

" 4. That to those whom, by his Absolute Will, 
God has foreordained to perdition, he has also de- 
creed to deny that grace which is necessary and 
sufficient for salvation, and does not in reality con- 
fer it upon them, so that they are neither placed in 
a possible condition, nor in any capacity of believ- 
ing or of being saved." 

He says : ''I reject this predestination for the 
following reasons : 

'' (1) Because it is not the foundation of Chris- 
tianity, of salvation, or of certainty. 

" (2) This doctrine of predestination comprises 
within it neither the whole nor any part of the 
gospel. 

'* (3) The doctrine was never admitted, de- 
creed, or approved in any Council, either general or 
particular, for the first six hundred years after 
Christ. 

" (4) None of those doctors or divines of the 
Church who held correct and orthodox sentiments 
for the first six hundred years after the birth of 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 105 

Christ, ever brought this doctrine forward, or gave 
it their approval. 

" (5) It neither agrees nor corresponds with the 
harmony of these Confessions, which were printed 
and published together in one volume at Geneva in 
the name of the Reformed Churches. 

" (6) It may very properly be made a question 
of doubt whether this doctrine agrees with the Bel- 
gic Confession, and the Heidelberg Catechism," 
which he proceeds to demonstrate. 

'' (7) This doctrine is repugnant to the nature 
of God, particularly to those attributes of his na- 
ture by which he performs and manages all things, 
his wisdom, justice, and goodness." " Repugnant to 
his wisdom, because it represents God as decreeing 
something for a particular end, which neither is nor 
can be good, . . . because it states that the 
object which God proposed to himself by this pre- 
destination was to demonstrate his mercy and jus- 
tice," which it can not demonstrate, " except by an 
act that is contrary at once to his mercy and justice, 
of which description is that decree of God in which 
he determined that man should sin, and be miser- 
able. It is repugnant to the justice of God, . . . 
affirming that God has absolutely willed to save 
certain individual men, and has decreed their sal- 
vation, without having the least regard to right- 
eousness or obedience ; . . . the proper infer- 
ence from which is, that God loves such men far 
more than his own justice," and " because it 



106 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

affirms that God wishes to subject his creatures to 
misery." 

" (8) Such a doctrine of predestination is con- 
trary to the nature of man in regard to his having 
been created after the Divine Image in the knowl- 
edge of God and righteousness, in regard to his 
having been created with a disposition and aptitude 
for the enjoyment of life eternal. 

'' (9) It is diametrically opposed to the act of 
creation ; for creation is a communication of good 
according to the intrinsic property of its na- 
ture. . . • Reprobation is an act of hatred, 
and from hatred derives its origin, and creation 
does not proceed from hatred ; . . . creation 
is a perfect act of God, by which he has manifested 
his wisdom, goodness, and omnipotence. 

*' (10) This doctrine is in open hostility with 
the nature of eternal life, and the titles by which 
it is signally distinguished in the Scriptures ; for it 
is called the inheritance of the sons of God, but 
those alone of the sons of God, according to the 
doctrine of the gospel, who believe in the name of 
Jesus Christ. . . . God, therefore, has not 
from his own absolute decree, without any consider- 
ation or regard whatever to faith and obedience, 
appointed to any man, or determined to appoint 
to him, life eternal. 

'* (11) This predestination is also opposed to the 
nature of eternal death, and to those appellations 
by which it is described in the Scriptures ; for it is 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 107 

called ' the wages of sin,' the punishment of ever- 
lasting destruction, which shall be recompensed to 
them that know not God, and that obey not the 
gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ ; . . . and God 
has not, by any absolute decree, without perfect re- 
spect to sin and disobedience, prepared eternal 
death for any person. 

** (12) This predestination is inconsistent with 
the nature and properties of sin in two ways : (1) 
Because sin is called disobedience and rebellion, 
neither of which terms can possibly apply to any per- 
son who, by a preceding Divine decree is placed under 
an unavoidable necessity of sinning ; (2) Because 
sin is the meritorious cause of damnation; but the 
meritorious cause which moves the Divine Will to 
reprobate, is according to justice, and it induces 
God, who holds sin in abhorrence, to will reproba- 
tion. Sin, therefore, which is a cause, can not be 
placed among the means by which God executes the 
decree or will of reprobation. 

*' (13) This doctrine is likewise repugnant to 
the nature of Divine grace, and, as far as its powers 
permit, it effects its destruction. 

'' (14) The doctrine of this predestination is 
injurious to the glory of God, for it makes God the 
author of sin. 

" (15) This doctrine is highly dishonorable to 
Jesus Christ, our Savior ; for it entirely excludes 
him from that decree of predestination which pre- 
destines the end, and argues that he is not the 



108 AR^IINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

foundation of election. ... It denies that 
Jesus Christ is a meritorious cause that again ob- 
tained for us the salvation which we had lost, by 
placing him as only a subordinate cause of that sal- 
vation, which had been already foreordained, and 
thus only a minister and instrument to apply that 
salvation unto us. 

" (16) This doctrine is hateful to the salvation 
of men, because it prevents that saving and godly 
sorrow for sins that have been committed, which 
can not exist in those who have no consciousness of 
sin, . . . and it removes all pious solicitude 
about being converted from sin unto God ; . . . 
it restrains, in persons that are converted, all zeal 
and studious regard for good works, since it de- 
clares that the degenerate can not perform either 
more or less good than they do ; ... it ex- 
tinguishes the zeal for prayer, which yet is an effi- 
cacious means instituted by God for asking and ob- 
taining all kinds of blessings from him, but takes 
away all that most salutary fear and trembling with 
which we are commanded to work out our own sal- 
vation ; ... it produces within men a despair 
both of performing that which their duty requires, 
and of obtaining that towards which their desires 
are directed. 

"(17) This doctrine inverts the order of the 
gospel of Jesus Christ. 

" (18) This predestination is in open hostility to 
the ministry of the gospel ; for if God by an irre- 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 109 

sistible power quickens him who is dead in trespasses 
aud sin, no man can be a minister and a laborer to- 
gether with God, nor can the word preached of man 
be the instrument of grace and of the Spirit. . . . 
By this predestination the ministry of the gospel is 
made the savor of death unto death in the case of 
the majority of those who hear it, as well as an in- 
strument of condemnation. . . . According to 
this doctrine, baptism, when administered to many 
reprobate children, is evidently a seal of nothing, 
and thus becomes useless. It hinders public prayers 
from being offered to God in a becoming and suitable 
manner, . . . The constitution of this doctrine 
is such as so very easily to render pastors slothful 
and negligent in the exercise of their ministry. 

" (19) This doctrine completely subverts the 
foundation of religion in general, and of the Chris- 
tian religion in particular. 

*' (20) This doctrine of predestination hath been 
rejected both in former times and in our own day by 
the greater part of the professors of Christianity. '* 

To the second form of predestination, which 
was also supralapsarian, Arminius said: "But 
though the inventors of this scheme have been de- 
sirous of using the greatest precaution, lest it might 
be concluded from their doctrine that God is the 
author of sin, with as much show of probability as 
is deducible from the first scheme, yet we shall dis- 
cover that the fall of Adam can not possibly, accord- 
ing to their views, be considered in any other man- 
8 



110 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

ner than as a Decessary meaDs for the execution of 
the preceding decree of predestination. For, first, it 
states that God determined by the decree of repro- 
bation to deny to man that grace which was necessary 
for the confirmation and strengthening of his na- 
ture, that it might not be corrupted by sin, which 
amounts to this, that God decreed not to bestow 
that grace which was necessary to avoid sin, and 
from this must necessarily follow the transgression 
of man as proceeding from a law imposed upon 
him. The fall of man is, therefore, a means or- 
dained for the execution of the decree of repro- 
bation. 

"It states that the two parts of reprobation are 
pretention and predamnation. These two parts — 
although the latter views man as a sinner and ob- 
noxious to justice — are, according to that decree, con- 
nected together by a necessary and mutual bond, 
and are equally extensive; for those whom God 
passed by in conferring grace are likewise damned. 
Indeed, no others are damned, except those who 
are the subjects of this act of preterition. From 
this, therefore, it must be concluded that sin neces- 
sarily follows from the decree of reprobation or 
preterition; because if it were otherwise, it might 
possibly happen that a person who had been passed 
by might not commit sin, and from that circum- 
stance might not become liable to damnation. This 
second opinion on predestination, therefore, falls 
into the same inconvenience as the first — the mak- 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. HI 

ing God the author of sin." (Watson's Theo- 
logical Institutes, Vol. II, pp. 392-393.) 

The third phase of predestination is Sublap- 
sarian, " in which man, as the object of predestina- 
tion, is considered fallen." Of this Arminius tersely 
said : ** Because God willed within himself from all 
eternity to make a decree by which he might elect 
certain men and reprobate the rest, he viewed and 
considered the human race, not only as created, 
but likewise as fallen or corrupt, and on that ac- 
count obnoxious to malediction. Out of this lapsed 
and accursed state, God determined to liberate cer- 
tain individuals, and freely to save them by his 
grace for a declaration of his mercy; but he resolved, 
in his own just judgment, to leave the rest under 
malediction for a declaration of his justice. In 
both these cases God acts without the slightest con- 
sideration of repentance and faith in those whom he 
elects, or of impenitence and unbelief in those 
whom he reprobates. This opinion places the fall 
of man, not as a means foreordained for the execu- 
tion of the decree of predestination, as before ex- 
plained, but as something that might furnish a 
proseresis, or occasion for this decree of predestina- 
tion." (Watson's Theological Institutes, Vol. II, 
pp. 393-394.) 

III. Arminianism, in its contact with Socinianism, 
was as outspoken in its antagonism to its dogma as when 
it sought to counteract predestination. 

Arminianism did not oscillate between the two, 



112 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORT. 

but maintained its attitude consistently, and dealt 
sturdy blows upon each, until each was made to 
feel the sandiness of its foundation. Socinianism 
held that "Christ was a man, miraculously con- 
ceived and divinely endowed, but not to receive 
divine worship ; that the object of his death was 
to perfect and complete his example, and to pre- 
pare the way for his resurrection, the necessary his- 
torical basis of Christianity ; that the soul is pure 
by nature, though contaminated by evil example 
and teaching from a very early age." One can not 
read the works of Arminius without finding a vast 
number of sentences opposing diametrically these 
Socinian doctrines. He taught the person of Jesus 
Christ as a perfect incarnation, a God-man. This 
Divine Being is the object of the most perfect wor- 
ship. Jesus Christ died, not as an example, but as 
a vicarious sacrifice for sin. The Arminianism of 
Arminius and Episcopius taught, in the best and 
highest sense, that without the shedding of blood 
there is no remission of sins. Here also was taught 
that man was not born in the world pure by na- 
ture, but by nature was corrupt. The child inherits 
a sinful nature. This sinful nature can only be 
changed and purified by the personal application of 
the blood of the atonement. 

There were some persons at a later date who 
made a cloak of Arminianism to teach heretical 
doctrine; but they were not Arminians, and did not 
teach Arminianism, and should not be held account- 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 113 

able to Arminianism. A full and complete atone- 
ment, perfect freedom of the will, and salvation by 
faith to all repenting sinners, was the kernel of Ar- 
minian teaching. 

IV. Arminianism, in its co7itact with Felagianism, 
was firm and true to tfie doctrines of the primitive Church. 

These doctrines respecting the nature of sin, and 
the absolute corrupted human nature, and the de- 
pendence upon divine grace for salvation, were 
taught in their strongest character. 

Pelagianism held that " there was no original 
sin through Adam, and consequently no hereditary 
guilt ; that every soul is created of God sinless; that 
the will is absolutely free, and that the grace of 
God is universal, but is not indispensable." While 
Pelagius held to a Divine Trinity, he had no office 
for the Second Person as a Savior of man. 

In every respect was Arminianism the antago- 
nist of Pelagianism. Arminianism taught that in 
the sin of Adam there was such a corruption of his 
nature that he communicated the taint to all of 
his posterity, and not one is born, or ever will be 
born, free from the corruption of sin. Arminianism 
makes clear the distinction between the corruption 
of our nature and the guilt of Adam. It holds 
that the grace of God is indispensably necessary to 
salvation, and without it, there is no coming to the 
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world for 
personal salvation. 

Arminianism says that there is a Divine Trinity, 



114 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY, 

and that the office of the Second Person of the 
Trinity is to make atonement for sin and reconcile 
God to man, thereby making it possible for all men, 
individually, to come to salvation and live forever. 
Arminianism is as distinct from Pelagianism as day 
is from night, even though the traducers of the 
system have undertaken to establish the opposite. 

V. Arminianism has been of immense value to the 
theological world, holding in check its extravagances, and 
moderating and liberalizing the harsh and illiberal 
spirit of Calvinism, and giving to mankind a more 
cJieerful view of God's relations to man. 

In speaking of the services of James Armin- 
ius in developing and advocating Arminianism, 
that great Arminian writer, Watson, in his Insti 
tutes, says: ''They preserved many of the Lu- 
theran Churches from the tide of Supralapsarian- 
ism, and its constant concomitant, Antinomian- 
ism. They moderated even Calvinism in many 
places, and gave better countenance and cour- 
age to the Sublapsarian scheme, which, though 
logically perhaps not so much to be preferred 
to that of Calvin, is at least not so revolting, 
and does not impose the same necessities upon 
men of cultivating that hardihood which glories 
in extremes and laughs at moderation. They 
gave rise, incidentally, to a still milder modification 
of the doctrine of decrees, known in England by 
the name of Baxterianism, in which homage is, at 
least in words, paid to the justice, truth, and be- 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 115 

nevolence of God. They have also left on record 
in the beautiful, learned, eloquent, and, above all 
these, the Scriptural system of theology furnished 
by the writings of Arminius, how truly man may 
be. proven totally and hereditarily corrupt, without 
converting him into a machine or a devil ; how 
fully secured in the scheme of the redemption of 
man by Jesus Christ, without making the Almighty 
partial, willful, and unjust ; how much the Spirit's 
operation in man is enhanced and glorified by the 
doctrine of the freedom of the human will, in con- 
nection with that of its assistance by Divine grace ; 
with how much luster the doctrine of justification 
by Christ shines, when offered to the assisted choice 
of all mankind instead of being confined to the 
forced acceptance of a few ; how the doctrine of 
election, when it is made conditional on faith un- 
foreseen, harmonizes with the wisdom, holiness, and 
goodness of God, among a race of beings to all of 
whom faith was made possible ; and how reproba- 
tion harmonizes with justice when it has a reason, 
not in arbitrary will, the sovereignty of a pasha, 
but in the principles of a righteous government." 
(McClintock and Strong, Vol. I, p. 415.) 

Dr. Copleston's Words. 

Since writing the above, I find a very fine 
rhume in one of the Bampton Lectures of the ex- 
cellent influence of Arminianism on Lutheranism. 
''It is pleasing and satisfactory," says Dr. Cople- 



116 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR Y. 

ston, '' to trace the progress of Melanchthon's opin- 
ion upon the subject [of universal redemption of 
mankind through the blood of Jesus Christ, by the 
exercise of repentance and faith of whosoever will]. 
In the first dawning of the Reformation, he, as well 
as Luther, had been led into some metaphysical dis- 
cussions, which Calvin afterwards molded into a 
system, and incorporated with his exposition of tha 
Christian doctrine. But so early as the year 1529 
he renounced this error, and expunged the passages 
that contained it from the later editions of his 
Loci Theologici. Luther, who had in his early life 
maintained the same opinions, after the controversy 
with Erasmus about free will, never taught them. 
And although he did not, with the candor of Me- 
lanchthon, openly retract what he had once written, 
yet he bestowed the highest commendations on the 
last editions of Melanchthon's work containing this 
correction. He also scrupled not to assert publicly 
that at the beginning of the Reformation his creed 
was not completely settled ; and in his last work of 
any importance he is anxious to point out the qual- 
ifications with which all he had said on the doctrine 
of absolute necessity ought to be received." 

Having thus traced the relation of Arminianism 
to Calvinism, Socinianism, and Pelagianism, and 
having seen the influence that similar doctrines 
which were abroad in the world previous to the day 
of Arminius, had upon the minds of Luther and 
Melanchthon, we are prepared to say that, in our 



DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES. 117 

humble judgment, Arminianism stands forth as the 
uncorrupted teaching of the primitive Church, the 
doctrine taught by the apostles, and the doctrine 
which they received from the Lord Jesus Christ. 
In no sense is Arminianism to be made responsible 
for the vagaries and heretical teachings of the 
Socinians, Pelagians, or any other sect or people, 
and to attempt to make them so responsible, is il- 
logical, unwise, and sinful. 



Chapter VI. 

PRB-WESIvEYAN ARMINIANISM IN EUROPE. 

Three Periods to be studied : 1st. Class of Arminian Writers, 
Limborch and his Theologia Christiana; 2d. Class of 
Arminian Writers: Voetius, at Leyden; Vorstins, Co- 
logne; Hnme's Statement regarding Vorstius ; 3d. Class 
of Writers — Phases of the Controversy— Not Protestant- 
ism alone rent with Discussion — Komanist Jansenists 
were Predestinationists—Jesuits were against Predestina- 
tion — Amyraut— Objective and Subjective Grace — Uni- 
tas Fratrum — Modern Moravians: Zinzendorf, Peter 
Bohler — Mennonnites — Arminian Conflict in England — 
Peter Baro— Sermon against the Lambeth Articles — John 
Playfere, a Professor at Cambridge— His Lectures on Ar- 
minian ism — Dr. Samuel Hoard — Dr. John Goodwin — 
Bishops Laud and Juxon — Fletcher's Estimate of Laud 
and his Arminianism— Hallam's Account of the Theo- 
logical Controversy — The Age of Theological Revolt in 
England — Jewell, Nowell, Sanders, and Cox — Zurich 
Letters — Bullinger and his Influence — James I attempts 
to control the Synod of Dort — Episcopal Arminian Di- 
vines: Cudworth, Pierce, Jeremy Taylor, Tillotson, 
Stillingfleet, etc. — Quotation as to the Theological 
Teaching in the Eighteenth Century. 

Mr. Wesley became, in his early career, one 
of the most earnest and strongest advocates of 
James Arminius's modes of interpreting the predes- 
tinationism of his age. When this bias was given 
to his mind, and by what influences, history is 
silent ; but we think, by tracing up the history of 
Arminianism, we shall find influences that necessa- 
118 



PRE- WESLE VAN A RMINIA NISM. 119 

rily wrought upon his mind, producing this effect. 
It is probable that his father had something to do 
with this early impression, for he was in revolt from 
the Calvinism of the Established Church soon after 
John's birth ; and his mother, though remaining 
somewhat in bondage, added to the impression of 
the goodness of God in providing a possible way 
for the salvation of a sinful soul. As Mr. Wesley 
studied all the phases of the Divine government 
with reference to men as a whole and as individ- 
uals, and grasped the greatness of the past, and 
then saw the magnitude of the power of God and 
his wonderful and inexhaustible resources, he most 
firmly took hold of the doctrine that " He is able 
to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by 
him, seeing that he ever liveth to make intercession 
for us." 

When the relation of Mr. Wesley to the revival 
of the Arminian doctrine is studied, there are three 
periods to be first considered, viz. : 

I. The second class of Arminian writers and 
scholars. 

II. Some persons who taught a corrupted, ex- 
travagant, and perverted Arminianism. 

III. Pre-Wesleyan Arminianism on the Conti- 
nent and in England. 

I. The second class of Arminian writers and 
scholars were generally strong, clear-minded, and 
accurate defenders of the doctrine. They were men 
of great learning, skilled in debate, and equally 



120 ARM INI A NISM IN HIS TORY. 

skillful in their writings. Whilst many of them 
were greatly persecuted, and driven from their pul- 
pits or professors' chairs, and compelled to endure 
hardships bodily, they still wielded an influence that 
was felt for good throughout the western portion of 
the Continent of Europe. 

Most of them were men capable of shining in 
any age of the world, and reflecting honor upon 
whatever institution or cause to which they at- 
tached their names. They left, in many cases, lu- 
crative positions, court favor, and certain advance- 
ment, for the sake of truth and principle. They 
clearly recognized the sandy foundation of foreor- 
dination, and the errors of the conclusions of Supra- 
lapsarian predestination, and the spiritual poverty 
involved in a necessitated will, and at once aban- 
doned them for a better, more liberal, more scien- 
tific, and more spiritual system, as found in Armin- 
ianism. Their history is worth tracing. Of the 
second class of Arminian writers, only one need be 
mentioned, who is an excellent representative of 
all. He was a truly great man. 

Philip Van Limborch. 

Philip Van Limborch was born in Amsterdam, 
June 19, 1633. He was a nephew, on his mother's 
side, of the great Episcopius, and inherited much 
of the same mental power which w^as possessed by 
this great man of the Church. His childhood was 
not particularly distinguished ; but when he com- 



PRE- WESLE YAN A RMINIA NISM. 121 

rnenced his studies in earnest, he became well versed 
in ethics, history, and philosophy. After his early 
studies at Amsterdam, he entered the university at 
Utrecht, where he heard Voetius lecture on the Re- 
formed Theology. The bias had been given to his 
theology while he listened to the Remonstrants at 
Amsterdam. From 1657, for ten years, Limborch 
was pastor of the Remonstrant Church at Gonda. 
From here he was called to Amsterdam as a pastor. 
His success was marked in the pastorate as a theo- 
logian, a brilliant orator, and a great-hearted man 
of God, who came in close contact with the common 
people. In 1668, he became professor of Divinity 
in the Remonstrant College of Amsterdam. Here 
his work was well received, and his influence in the 
Church and theological world felt to its fullest ex- 
tent. His great intellectual powers had a splendid 
scope for their full exercise. He remained in dis- 
charge of his duties in this important official re- 
lation until April 30, 1712, when death closed his 
mortal career. Limborch was a man of great in- 
tellectual force, and so threw himself into his teach- 
ings and writings with enthusiasm as to have a 
wide circle of influence, and to leave an enduring 
impression upon theology for the coming genera- 
tions. Staudlein, a celebrated Holland writer, says 
of this man: "The most complete exposition of 
the Arminian doctrine is the celebrated work by 
Philip Van Limborch, a man distinguished for 
genius, learning, and modesty, whose literary labors 



122 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

are of great value. The very arrangemeDt of his 
system displays originality. Admirable perspicuity 
and judicious selection of the material characterized 
the entire work." 

** Limborch," says another writer, "was gentle 
in his disposition, tolerant of the views of others, 
learned, methodical, of a retentive memory, and 
above all, had a love for truth, and engaged in the 
search of it by reading the Scriptures with the best 
commentators." As a Remonstrant theologian he 
stood next to Arminius and Episcopius. His writ- 
ings were clear, forcible, elegantly expressed, and 
introduced no novelties into the system as advo- 
cated by the learned Arminius. Among many 
works published by him, he performed his greatest 
feat by publishing "A Complete System or Body of 
Divinity, Both Speculative and Practical, Founded 
on Scripture and Beason." Of this work it is said : 
** This was the first and most complete exposition 
of the Arminian doctrine, displaying great original- 
ity of arrangement, and admirable perspicuity, and 
judicious selection of material. The preparation of 
this work was undertaken at the request of the Re- 
monstrants." 

Of Limborch's power as a commentator Dr. 
Kitto has spoken when reviewing his exegetical 
" Commentarius in Acta. Apos. et in Epistolas ad 
Romanes et ad Hebrseos." " This commentary," says 
Kitto, " though written in the interest of the au- 
thor's theological views, is deserving of attention 



PRE- WESLE YAN A RMINIA NISM. 123 

for the good sense, clear thought, and acute reason- 
ing by which it is pervaded." 

Limborch, among other works, published his 
" Theologia Christiana" in 1688, at the request of 
the Remonstrants. This book was a clear setting 
forth of a complete system of religion, and a 
*' Book of Divinity," both speculative and practical, 
" founded on Scripture and reason." It was an ex- 
position of the Arminian doctrines, and was not at 
variance with what had been taught, first by Ar- 
minius, and afterwards by Simon Episcopius. Of 
this work of Limborch's, it is said that it was '' the 
first and most complete exposition of the Arminian 
doctrine, displaying great originality of arrange- 
ment, and admirable perspicuity, and judicious se- 
lection of material." The distinctions which Lim- 
borch made between Arminianism and Calvinism 
were very clear and exceedingly convincing. The 
temper with Avhich he entered upon and prosecuted 
this work was all that could have been asked of any 
theologian by the most captious and fault-finding 
person. He had no hard names or unkind epi- 
thets for opponents, and did not desire to indicate 
that it was impossible for those who held a doctrine 
contrary to his own to be brought into fellowship 
with the Divine Jesus, and be eternally saved. 
There was the same liberality which had been ex- 
hibited on the part of all the great champions of 
Arminianism who had preceded him. 

II. There were some persons who taught a cor- 



124 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORT. 

rupted, extravagant, and perverted Arminianism, 
for which true Arminianism should not be held ac- 
countable. 

Gysburtius Voetius. 

Gysburtius Voetius, D. D., was one of the earlier 
of the men who taught Arminianism in a distorted 
and unnatural manner. He was born in 1588, at 
Heusden, in Holland. When a student at Leyden, 
he listened to the teachings of both Gomarus and 
Arminius. He leaned to the Calvinism of Gomarus, 
but became well acquainted with the language of 
Arminius and his doctrines. In the process of time 
Voetius became an adept in controversy, having a 
taste for that kind of work. His language against 
Arminianism was sometimes immoderate and un- 
kind. He had neither love nor respect for " Zwing- 
lianism, nor Melanchthonism, and no admiration 
for Grotius," He called Erasmus "an Arian, Pe- 
lagian, Socinian, and skeptic." ''His great am- 
bition was the achievement of the overthrow of 
Arminianism, and this influenced his scholarly char- 
acter as well as his general conduct. His exegesis 
lacked independence, and aimed less at the dis- 
covery of what constituted religious truth than at 
the invention of philological and other arguments 
to defend the system he preferred." The state- 
ments of Voetius, which were harsh and " in a bar- 
barous, artificial terminology," and did not always 
have a regard for a " true statement of the doc- 



phe- wesle yan a rminia nism. 125 

trines of A-rminius," had very much to do with 
making a "corrupted, extravagant, and perverted 
Arminianism." 

Conrad Vorstius. 

Conrad A^orstius, born in 1569, at Cologne, edu- 
cated at Dusseldorf and Cologne, became a doctor 
at Heidelberg, and was professor of Theology at 
Steinfurt, a situation accepted in place of the 
same which was offered him at Geneva. On the 
death of Arminius he was called to Leyden. Be- 
fore this he had published " Disputationes de Na- 
tura et Attributis Dei," in w^hich he championed 
Arminianism. The fame of this preceded him to 
Leyden, and, on arriving, he found his hands and 
head full of labor, maintaining his doctrine, espe- 
cially that regarding " Christ and predestination." 
He seems to have very ably defended his positions, 
and took his place as a professor, and continued to 
advocate these doctrines for a number of years. 
His book reached England, and King James I be- 
came involved, in some way, in the ' controversy. 
*'A professor of Divinity, named Vorstius," says 
Hume, " the disciple of Arminius, was called from 
a German to a Dutch university, and as he differed 
from his Britannic Majesty in some nice questions 
concerning the intimate essence and secret decrees 
of God, he was considered a dangerous rival in 
scholastic fame, and was at last obliged to yield to 
the legions of that royal doctor, whose syllogisms 
9 



126 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

he might have refuted or eluded. If vigor was 
wanting in other incidents of James's reign, here he 
behaved even with haughtiness and insolence ; and 
the States were obliged, after several remonstrances, 
to deprive Vorstius of his chair, and to banish him 
from their dominions." (Hume's History of Eng- 
land, Vol. IV, p. 421.) 

HI. Pre-Wesleyan Arminianism on the Conti- 
nent and in England, when traced out, is found to 
present three phases : 1. A leaning away from Cal- 
vinism, seemingly toward Pelagianism and Univer- 
salism. 2. An attempt to shun this appearance by 
leaning toward Calvinism, and yet not to Calvin- 
ism. 3. Maintaining the true position between 
Calvinism and Pelagianism, not in a moderate Au- 
gustinism, but in the doctrines of Arminius, to wit : 
"That God created man upright and pure, and 
placed him in a probation state, with power to en- 
dure all temptation, and ability to fall, and, when 
man sinned, made a way possible for all men to re- 
turn to him and purity, on condition of repent- 
ance and faith, to be exercised in the utmost free- 
dom of the will, or by the same will to be rejected." 

Protestantism was not alone torn by internal 
dissensions and contentions regarding " grace and 
free will." In the Roman Catholic Church the 
great monastic orders, "Dominicans and Benedic- 
tines, contended for their several opinions, while in 
France Jesuits and Jansenists took the field of con- 
trovesy, ... the Jansenists, being the Ke- 



PRE' WESLE YAN A RMINIA NISM. 127 

formed or Calvinistic party, while the Jesuits were 
the Free-will advocates." But all these parties so 
soon ran off on a tangent from religion into poli- 
tics, that they lost sight entirely of the subject of 
freedom of the will and predestination. 

Moses Amyraut. 

There was a man by the name of Amyraut, 
sometimes called Amyrauldus, born in Anjou in 
1596, who embraced Protestantism, and became 
professor of Theology at Bourgueil. He started out 
as a strong Calvinist, but after a time it began to 
be whispered that his teachings regarding predes- 
tination and grace were not orthodox according to 
the dictum of Geneva. In 1634 he published his 
views, which were called Universalist and Armin- 
ian. On a careful examination of them, it is found 
that they are neither. They were more Calvinistic 
than anything else. It is claimed by those who 
have thoroughly investigated the subject, that he 
had one eye on the Lutheran doctrine, and the 
other on Calvinism, and he hoped to be the medi- 
ator to reconcile the two branches of Christian 
theology. Amyraut asserted a " gratia universalis," 
but he meant not what Arminius taught by the use 
of such a term. " He meant by it simply that God 
desires the happiness of all men, provided they will 
receive his mercy in faith ; that none can receive 
salvation without faith in Christ, that God refuses 
to none the power of believing, but that he does 



128 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

not grant to all his assistance, that they improve 
their power to saving purposes ; that none can so 
improve it without the Holy Spirit, which God is 
not bound to grant to any, and, in fact, does grant 
only to those who are elect according to his eter- 
nal decree." 

As if to show how far Amyraut was from true 
Arminianism, it may be said that " he distinguished 
between objective and subjective grace." Object- 
ive grace offers salvation to all men on condition 
of repentance and faith, and is universal ; subject- 
ive grace operates morally in the conversion of 
the soul, and in particular — that is, only given to 
the elect. Such teaching is not Arminianism, 
even though branded as such by its enemies. 

The Lutherans Tended to Arminianism. 

We have already seen that the Lutherans, under 
the teaching of the polished Melanchthon, strongly 
sympathized with the Arminians, and not with the 
Calvinists. The peculiar notion of Luther regard- 
ng the Lord's Supper being " consubstantiation," 
tended to prevent the adoption of the Calvinistic 
doctrines in Germany, especially that of predesti- 
nation. The Sacramental Controversy was not for- 
gotten. It acted like a barrier against the inroads 
of the Reformed doctrine of Geneva. It was sup- 
posed that the rude action of the Synod of Dort 
had completely crushed -the Arminian movement; 
but Ebrard says : ' ' This outward show of victory 



PRE- WESLEYAN A RMINIA NISM. 129 

was really a defeat ; for the true elements of Ar- 
miniaDism were not killed at Dort, but grew up 
silently but surely within the bosom of the ortho- 
dox Reformed Church." 

Unitas Fratrum. 

When we turn to the Churches of the Conti- 
nent that were Arminian before the Wesleyan 
movement, we find the ''Unitas Fratrum," United 
Brethren, or Moravians, standing out prominently, 
and clearly advocating freedom of the will and sal- 
vation provided for all men, in opposition to the 
predestination doctrine. 

Zlnzendorf and the Moravians. 

The modern Moravians, sometimes called Herrn- 
hutters and Zinzendorfians, had their revival in 
Count Zinzendorf, about 1722. Zinzendorf came 
in contact with some Christians of Moravia, who 
were compelled to flee from their native land in 
consequence of the religious persecutions which they 
suffered. Zinzendorf was a man of wealth, and 
owned a large territory in Germany. He invited 
these persecuted Christians to come there, settle, 
and engage in lawful business. Being moved by 
the Holy Spirit, he determined " faithfully to take 
charge of poor souls for whom Christ had shed his 
blood, and especially to collect together and protect 
those who were oppressed and persecuted." Under 
his godly direction, the company prospered and 



130 ARMINIA NI8M IN HIST OR Y. 

increased in wealth, at the same time that they were 
growing in a rich religious experience. The sect 
became early impressed with the command of God 
to go into all the world and preach the gospel to 
every creature. Consequently they set out for 
other lands to disciple them. They believed that 
Christ Jesus died for all mankind, and made it pos- 
sible for all to come to him for salvation. This 
belief led them to travel to Poland, to England, to 
the wilds of North America, then to Africa and to 
the islands of the sea, to preach the gospel. In 
America, and afterwards in Europe, they came in 
contact with the Wesleys, and left a sensible impres- 
sion upon them. The class of theologians raised 
up among the Moravians — such as Peter Bohler 
and Nitschmann — were strong preachers of a pure 
Arminianism. They taught, preached, and wrote 
this system in perfect accord with the purest state- 
ment of the doctrine. 

Mennonites. 

The Mennonites also antedated Arminius in the 
advocacy of his doctrine. While originally they 
were called Anabaptists, and their character was 
doubtless marred and influenced by some practices 
not to be tolerated in these later days, yet, when 
Menno Simons effected his great Reformation, there 
came out a sect or people clear from all the old 
and vile practices, and with an evangelism worthy 
of imitation by the best. The Mennonites held 



PRE- WESLE YAN ARMINIA NISM. 131 

that "the sacrifice of Christ's death is set forth as 
applicable to all mankind; the Mennonite doctrine 
thus symbolizing with Arminianisra, and not Cal- 
vinism." (Diet, of Sects, Heresies, etc., by Blunt, 
p. 311.) 

While there have been two distinct changes in 
the Confession of Faith of the Mennonites up to 
the present time, there has been no change in the 
phase of the doctrines regarding original sin, pre- 
destination, freedom of the will, and the possible 
personal salvation of each individual human being. 

Arminianism in England. 

The Arminianism conflict began in England 
early in the seventeenth century. Much controversy 
has been had as to whether the xlrticles of Religion, 
as drawn up for the Church of England, were in their 
design Calvinistic or Arminian. They have been 
held by some as strongly Calvinistic, while a few 
have said that they were designed to be Arminian. 
Whatever may have been the design, the reader of 
the Articles can not come to any other conclusion 
than that they are Calvinistic, and are the language 
of Geneva, and breathe the spirit of predestination 
in its strongest form. Cranmer is sometimes spoken 
of as an Arminian ; but since he had much to do 
with the influences shaping the Articles of Religion 
of the Church of England, somewhere his Armin- 
ianism became greatly perverted into Calvinism. 



132 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

Peter Baro. 

Peter Baro, a Frenchman of culture, was made 
' ' Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity " in Trinity 
College, Cambridge. He opposed predestination as 
taught by the Calvinists, and continued to advocate 
"free will and salvation possible to all men," until 
in 1595 the Calvinists drew up the "Lambeth 
Articles," "which were confirmed by Archbishop 
Whitgift and others." Baro delivered a sermon 
opposing these Articles with great logic and clear- 
ness. The matter coming to the attention of the 
authorities, he was ordered by the vice-chancellor 
to * ' abstain from all controversy on Articles of 
Faith." This man held to Arminian doctrines 
before they were so distinctly advocated, of the 
same character as held by James Arminius and 
Simon Episcopius. 

John Playfere. 

John Playfere, a successor of Baro as Marga- 
ret Professor at Cambridge, in 1608 became an 
Arminian in doctrine, of pronounced views. "He 
lectured on the subject to his classes, and the spirit 
of Arminianism spread quite widely." He pub- 
lished a work on the subject, having the title "An 
Appeal to the Gospel for the True Doctrine of 
Predestination." Thomas Baker, the antiquary, 
says that if " PI ay fere's sermons had never been 
printed, his name would yet have been honored in 



PRE-WESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 133 

history, so decidedly marked was his influence on 
the times." 

Samuel Hoard. 

Another eminent collegian was Dr. Samuel 
Hoard, the rector of Moreton College, who became 
a strong Arminian, though originally a rank Cal- 
vinist. He published a work entitled, "God's 
Love to Mankind Manifested by Disproving His 
Absolute Decree for Their Damnation." Rev. John 
Goodwin was another strong advocate of Arminian- 
ism, for which he was ejected from his place and 
position in 1645. 

Laud and Juxon. 

Two bishops, Laud and Juxon, became Ar- 
minians, though they were the advocates of some 
peculiarities not in the Arminian doctrine, and 
perhaps did as much harm to the doctrine among 
the people as they did good. Laud was a singular 
man, and because of his impetuosity made many 
bitter enemies. It was about 1617, while in the 
deanery of Gloucester, that he procured from 
James I "direction for the better government of 
the university, which contained the first official dis- 
approbation of the tenets of the Calvinists." 

These bishops, especially Laud, went from the 
field of theology purely into the work of the State, 
so that, from the time he was made a bishop until 
the end of his life, he was doing more in the line 



134 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

of statecraft than of Christian theology. Because 
of this he is not to be recognized as a safe leader in 
those matters which require subtle distinctions and 
careful investigation in order to detect error and 
bring to light in the clearest manner the truth 
of God. 

Fletcher's Account of Laud. 

Fletcher gives a just estimate of Laud and his 
Arminianism. " Archbishop Laud," says Fletcher, 
' ' in the days of King James and Charles I, caused 
in the gospel scales the turn which then began to 
take place in our Church in favor of the doctrines 
of justice. He was the chief instrument which, like 
Moses' rod, began to part the boisterous sea of Cal- 
vinism. He received his light from Arminius, but 
it was corrupted by a mixture of Pelagian dark- 
ness. He aimed rather at putting down absolute 
reprobation and lawless grace than at chaining up 
the grace and reconciling the contending parties 
by recognizing the two Gospel axioms. Hence, 
passing beyond the Scripture meridian, he led most 
of the English clergy from one extreme to the 
other." (Fletcher's Works, Vol. H, pp. 276, 277.) 

England's Condition as seen by Hallam. 

Mr. Hallam has gracefully touched the condi- 
tion of English theological politics at this period. 
''A far more permanent controversy sprung up 
about the end of the same reign" (James I), says 



PRE-WESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 135 

Hallam, "which afforded a pretext for intolerance, 
and a fresh source of mutual hatred. Every one 
of my readers is acquainted more or less with the 
theological tenets of original sin, free will, and 
predestination, variously taught in the schools and 
debated by polemical writers for so many centuries ; 
and few can be ignorant that the Articles of our 
own Church, as they relate to these doctrines, have 
been very differently interpreted, and that a contro- 
versy about their meaning had long been carried on 
with a pertinacity which could not have continued 
on so limited a topic had the combatants been merely 
influenced by the love of truth. Those who have 
no bias to warp their judgment will not, perhaps, 
have much hesitation in drawing the line between, 
though not at an equal distance between, the con- 
tending parties. It appears, on the one hand, that 
the Articles are worded on some of these doctrines 
with considerable ambiguity, whether we attribute 
this to the intrinsic obscurity of the subject, to thie 
additional difficulties with which it has been entan- 
gled by theological systems, to discrepancy of 
opinion in the compilers, or to their solicitude to 
prevent disunion by adopting formularies to which 
men of different sentiments might subscribe. It is 
also manifest that their framers came, as it were, 
with averted eyes to the Augustinian doctrine of 
predestination, and wisely reprehended those who 
turned their attention to a system so pregnant with 
objections, and so dangerous when needlessly dwelt 



136 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

upon, to all practical piety and virtue. But, on 
the other hand, the very reluctance to inculcate 
the tenet is so expressed as to manifest their un- 
doubting belief in it ; nor is it possible, either, to 
assign a motive for inserting the Seventeenth Ar- 
ticle, or to give any reasonable interpretation to it 
upon the present theory which passes for orthodox 
in the English Church. And upon other subjects 
intimately related to the former — such as the pen- 
alty of original sin, and the depravation of human 
nature — the Articles, after making every allowance 
for want of precision, seem totally irreconcilable 
with the scheme usually denominated Arminian." 

Age of Theological Kevolt. 

This was an age of theological revolt in Eng- 
land. The great leaders, Jewell, Nowell, Sandys, 
Cox, "professed to concur with the Reformers 
of Zurich and Geneva." The Zurich letters, pub- 
lished later, evidenced how much Calvin and 
BuUinger had, by their works, to do with English 
Calvinism and government-shaping. Their works 
were text-books in English universities. "Those 
who did not hold the predestination theory were 
branded with reproach by the names of Free-willers 
and Pelagians." 

From the time when James I attempted to con- 
trol the Synod of Dort until long after the Com- 
monwealth, the English mind was dreadfully dis- 
turbed concerning Calvinism. It was seething and 



PRE- WESL EYAN A RMINIA NISM. 137 

bubbling like an angry pot. King and court were 
alike disturbed. When the Lambeth Articles were 
formed to teach the strongest Calvinism, and 
Archbishop Whitgift indorsed them, they were 
met by Lord Burleigh with disapproval ; for his 
faith in predestination, either Sublapsarian or Su- 
pralapsarian had been greatly shaken, and they 
were not legally sanctioned. As the Greek fathers 
were read more in England, free will and anti-pre- 
destination doctrines were embraced, and the dog- 
mas of Augustine, Gottschalk, Calvin, and Bul- 
linger diminished. 

The Episcopal Arminian divines in this century 
were among the great theologians of England. 
Such men as these were Arminian in their teach- 
ing : Cudworth, Pierce, Jeremy Taylor, Tillotson, 
Chillingworth, Stillingfleet, Womock, Burnet, 
Pierson, Sanderson, Heylin, Whitby, Patrick, 
Tomline, Copleston, Whately, etc. While these 
eminent divines, one after the other, took up the 
doctrines of Arminianism, advocating them in their 
entirety, or in such parts and characters as seemed 
to demand their attention, they were making a 
decided impression upon the great mind and heart 
of the country. The whole of English theology 
was becoming honeycombed by the doctrines of 
Arminius. While Calvinism represented one ex- 
treme and Arminianism the other, between them 
were all manner of ideas. 

It would not be surprising if, in this discussion 



138 ARMINIANISM IN RIST0R7. 

of that period, there would be found many things 
which could not be tested and found genuine 
under the light of Arminianism of to-day. 

The following is a very clear statement of the 
theological teaching about the time of the coming 
of John Wesley: "Arminianism at last, in the 
Church of England, became a negative term, imply- 
ing a negation of Calvinism, rather than any exact 
system of theology whatever. Much that passed 
for Arminianism was in fact Pelagianism. The 
history of English theology will show that all who 
have deviated from the golden mean maintained by 
Arminius, between Calvinism on the one hand and 
Pelagianism on the other, have fallen into error as 
to the Trinity, while those who have adhered to 
the evangelical doctrine of Arminius have retained 
all the verity of the orthodox faith. The pure 
doctrine of Arminianism rose again in England 
in the great Wesleyan Reformation of the seven- 
teenth century." 



Chapter VII. 

THE POLITICAIv HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 

Calvinism in the Netherlands — Puritanism — Arminianism — 
Eomanism — Under Philip H of Spain — Causes for 
Philip's AVant of Success — Industries in the Towns of 
the Netherlands — Towns ver}^ Important — Origin and 
Growth of the Guilds — Philip's Cruelty— Council of 
Troubles— Alva— William of Orange, the Silent— Will- 
iam was Stadtholder of HoUand etc.— The Sea— Eng- 
land — The Tax of Alva repudiated — All Industry- 
ceased — Spanish Soldiers starved — Fury of Alva — How 
his Inhumanity was Checkmated — "Beggars of the 
Sea"— Dikes Cut— WiUiam Successful— Oath of the 
People — Louis of Nassau — States Assembly ordered 
by Alva to meet at The Hague, but they meet William at 
Dort — A Compact — Elizabeth and her Promise — Coligny 
slaughtered — Alva afraid of Orange — Orange in Hol- 
land—Reviving Hope — The Turning Point of Nether- 
landish Freedom — Leyden taken by Orange — To Com- 
memorate the Event a University was founded — Many 
Protestants went to Leyden from Catholic France — 
William of Orange assassinated— Rejoicing at Rome and 
Madrid — Protestantism not dead — Puritanism grow- 
. ing— Success of Arminianism— The Political Home of 
Arminianism an Important Factor in its Permanency 
and Success. 

The Political Home of Arminianism. 

That little country bn the northwest coast of 
Europe, which had been rescued from the -sea by the 
hard and persistent labor of the people, was the 
early home of two great classes of thought, founded 

139 



140 ARMINIANI8M IN mSTORT. 

upon a solid basis — Puritanism and Arminianism. 
These two ideas were by no means the same ; but 
they originated near together, and possessed some 
things in common. They represent two forms of 
that internal struggle of the enlightened man, who 
is conscious of better and higher destinies and priv- 
ileges than had been accorded him in society as it 
had existed. Puritanism did not take hold of the 
great doctrines of religion as found in Christianity, 
and seek to amplify, teach, and enforce them. 
Her mission appeared to be the survey of the po- 
litical aspects of all moral and civil questions, and 
give direction to the human forces to building up 
of a country on sound principles of human freedom 
and right, so that all citizens should be able to en- 
joy the highest possible civil liberty. Arminianism 
took hold of and discusssed great religious doctrines, 
those essential to personal salvation, cleared away 
the mystery and cruelty, the mental and spiritual 
darkness surrounding the old Calvinistic doctrines 
of predestination and reprobation. She sought to 
lift up the despondent heart of sinful men to the 
spiritual freedom of salvation provided for all men, 
and received by all on the condition of "repent- 
ance towards God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus 
Christ." 

Puritanism was civil in its trend ; Arminianism 
was spiritual in its highest efforts. Both were re- 
volts. Puritanism was a revolt from illegal usur- 
pation, and Arminianism was a revolt from the 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 141 

dogma binding the mind and heart of mankind 
under a cruel predestinationism. They originated in 
their new character in Holland or the Netherlands, 
and have both found their highest sphere of action 
in the United States of America. 

It will serve our purpose to speak briefly of the 
geographical and political relations of the early 
home of Arminianism. The country on the north- 
west coast of Europe was called, sometimes, the Low 
Countries, because so much of it lay below the 
sea-level, and whose waters were kept out by im- 
mense dikes or levees, against which the breakers 
surged and roared, wasting their fury on walls 
reared by brave hearts and hands ; sometimes called 
Netherlands, or Northlands, because of their rela- 
tion to France and Normandy; sometimes called 
Holland, or Hollo wland, the largest State in the 
confederacy. The territory was small, being only 
about half the size of England, when the whole 
seventeen are considered. Ten of these little 
States, those on the south and now forming Belgium, 
were Catholic, and were ruled by a foreign Cath- 
olic prince. The seven lying to the north revolted 
from Catholicism, and were Protestant. The for- 
eign Roman Catholic power sought to seize and 
hold these seven provinces, and convert them to the 
religion and service of Rome. But they had in- 
born a spirit of independence, both in the power 
to govern and the power to think, and refused 
obedience to a foreign power. These men of ster- 
10 



142 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

ling worth, independence of spirit, and nobility of 
character, united and formed the "Dutch Repub- 
lic," known as the "United Netherlands." It had 
only about 13,000 square miles of territory, water 
and land, and to possess this from the restless 
North Sea required a continuous fight. It had no 
natural boundaries on the south and east, by which 
an invading foe might be kept out. Yet it car- 
ried on a war for eighty years against the cruel 
Roman foe, who sought the entire destruction of 
the Republic. These seven States were only one- 
fourth as large as England. "Little, historic 
Greece was half as large again." She was one- 
twentieth as large as France, a Roman Catholic 
country, and, when compared with Europe, was but 
one three-hundredths of the whole. This little spot 
of country, filled with sturdy and determined peo- 
ple, bravely, fearlessly, and continually withstood 
the encroachments of foes by sea and land. In 
this country was the new birth of Puritanism and 
Arminianism. Full attention to Puritanism will 
reveal why and how she lived, and why Arminian- 
ism found a good soil in which to grow. 

At the time of the revolt of Puritanism in the 
Netherlands, the seventeen States were under the 
domination of Philip II of Spain, a prince of ab- 
solute superstition, and of a cruelty of nature not 
to be excelled even by the cruel and blind old Tor- 
quemada. The old emperor, the Castilian Charles 
V, had become sick and morose. The pains of the 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 143 

gout were so excruciating that they greatly added 
to the weariness of ruling. He abdicated the 
throne, and placed upon it his son, Philip II. 
Charles V had never given himself much concern 
about the conduct of these States of the north. 
Each State had " an hereditary ruler, called a duke, 
marquis, count, or baron." The overlord, Philip II, 
appointed ''governors or stadtholders, to represent 
his sovereignty in the various provinces, and a 
regent to govern the whole." In these States were 
about 3,000,000 people. They w^ere an industrious 
people, which made them unusually prosperous. 
They studied much, and became very intelligent. 
While Charles V lived and ruled, the people had 
but little of which they complained ; but when 
Philip came into power, they at once realized the 
will and cruelty of the new ruler. 

Why did Philip II never succeed in ruling the 
Netherlands ? Mr. Campbell, in his excellent book, 
"The Puritan in Holland, England, and America," 
gives the reason : ' ' That successor [of Charles V— 
Philip II] never understood the people committed 
to his rule, knew nothing of their spirit, and could 
not comprehend Avhy they so insisted on their civil 
and religious rights. Throughout the rest of Eu- 
rope, the feudal tyranny having passed away, the 
monarchs were absorbing all the power. Such was 
the case in neighboring France, in Sj^ain, where 
Philip was born and reared, and in England, where 
he found a wife. Why should he not govern these 



1 44 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR T. 

provinces in the same manner as the other parts of 
his dominions ? That he could not, he discovered 
before his death." (Vol. I, p. 137.) 

The situation of the Netherlands was such that 
the greater part of their industry must be carried 
on in town. Even the agricultural enterprises con- 
tributed to the business carried forward in the 
towns. Since the millions of people could not find 
ample scope for their energies in the soil, they 
naturally developed manufacturing. The country 
became dotted with walled towns. In a little while 
they became strong enough for defense against for- 
eign foes. This gave the people a taste for liberty 
and independency. Already a quasi-Puritanism 
was showing itself. It could be but a little way 
before Puritanism will be full-fledged. 

There grew up almost insensibly the guilds — 
some for mutual protection, some for trades, and 
some for social interests. While it is doubtful if 
any political complexion was given them at the 
outset, in the Netherlands they soon "assumed the 
government of towns." The name of earlier times 
gave place to another, expressing the idea of ' ' com- 
mune." About the guilds was a semi-religious at- 
mosphere ; for, on admission to membership, the 
candidate "took an oath to uphold divine worship, 
and to serve his count legally and with all his 
might." Once in the guild, there was a wonderful 
equality among the members. There was a real 
democracy. When the time came to assume polit- 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 145 

ical relations and duties, it was but natural for 
workmen to carry their ideas of equality and re- 
ligion into their citizen responsibilities. 

Many cities came to be of so much conse- 
quence as to obtain a charter, and with the charter 
certain extraordinary rights and privileges of a 
social, religious, and political character. They 
greatly increased their means of defense. They 
became practically impregnable. They molested no 
one, and were not willing that any should molest 
them. The smaller towns contiguous to the larger 
cities, naturally placed themselves under the pro- 
tection of these fastnesses. In turn, the smaller 
towns lent their aid to the enriching of the cities 
in return for this protection. A common interest 
led all the chartered cities and their dependent 
towns to a mutual interchange of sentiment, so that, 
for the protection of all, they were united. They 
made a common cause. It was against their free- 
dom-loving, liberty-enjoying, wealth-obtaining, and 
worship-observing people that Philip II hurled his 
forces, to be met by a sad but certain defeat. 

When Philip II came to attempt to exercise his 
power in the Netherlands in cruelty, that people, 
so unused to such things, mildly protested. Then 
the Inquisition and Margaret of Parma were sent to 
quell the rising tide of insubordination. Margaret 
found a power too great to meet and overthrow. 
There were uprisings in various quarters. Then 
Alva, the duko, as cruel a Spaniard, as unscrupu- 



146 A RMINIANISM IN HIS TORY. 

lous a Catholic, and as superstitious a Romanist as 
ever lived, was sent to take command, with ten 
thousand picked men of the Spanish army. He 
entered the Netherlands, organized the "Council of 
Troubles," which, by its inhuman practices, soon 
came to be called the " Council of Blood." The 
story of the bloody scenes of this period is horrible 
in the extreme. The very rivers were flooded with 
human blood, and the very lakes and inlets were 
colored with gore. The wails of anguish that went 
up from this country were enough to move a heart 
of stone. 

" Man's inhumanity to man 
Made countless thousands mourn." 

Alva commenced his inhuman butchery in 
August, 1567. 

Reared at the court of Charles V was William 
of Orange, the man of destiny, who was ultimately 
to deliver his people. It was upon the arm of Will- 
iam of Orange that Charles V leaned when he 
performed "the magnificent ceremony of his ab- 
dication." While at the Court of St. Cloud, Will- 
iam developed a quality which gave him the name 
of " Silent." It was when the King of France re- 
vealed to him his league with Philip of Spain to 
crush out heresy everywhere in his kingdoms. Si- 
lently he listened. Great thoughts filled his mind, 
and great purposes filled his brave heart. He re- 
solved to thwart the purpose of Philip II regarding 
his own loved native Netherlands. 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANIBM 147 

Philip appointed William of Orange Stadtholder 
of Holland, Zealand, and Utrecht. It was a long 
way and a rough way before AVilliam could lay 
the foundation of the Dutch Republic. Caution, 
coupled with steadiness of purpose, ever kept him 
from any rash acts that would lead to a thwarting of 
his great purpose. He, of all others, understood 
what was meant by the coming of Alva. He went 
into voluntary exile. Protestants began to rally to 
his aid. In 1568 he hoped the time had arrived 
for decisive and successful action. So he hurled his 
few troops against Alva, and failed. Orange fled 
to France, and joined the Huguenots. He was the 
warm friend of Coligny. 

The sea was destined to be the stronghold and 
tast friend of the Netherlanders. Privateers, bear- 
ing the commission of the Prince of Conde, preyed 
upon some rich Spanish merchantmen. Some of 
these merchant vessels fled for safety into English 
ports, and Elizabeth seized the vessels, and con- 
verted the money to her use. Alva was furious. 
Elizabeth promised restoration, but it was never 
made. He appealed to Philip, in Spain. Delay 
followed delay, until four years had passed before 
anything came of it. Matters continued to go on 
in the Netherlands in a fierce persecution. The 
people were roused. They were ready for any revolt. 
In Spain, gold was becoming scarce, and the stream 
of supplies failed to flow to Alva, and great dis- 
content arose among his Spanish troops. In his 



148 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

vexation and distress, Alva proposed to tax directly 
all the land of the Netherlands one per cent per 
annum, and one-tenth of the selling price of the 
sales of personal property. He submitted this 
proposition to the States Assemblies in 1569, but 
they received it with indignation. Alva would not. 
modify his demand. At last, Utrecht alone refused 
to accede to his demands, and her people Avere sub- 
jected to a heavy fine. The leaven was working. 
The Protestant indignation was deepening in the 
Netherlands. The time would soon be ripe for an- 
other blow to be struck in a revolt that should 
shiver Alva and the Spanish hopes forever, so far 
as Holland was concerned. 

The heroic Netherlanders, repudiating the tax 
of Alva, suspended business. All industry came to 
a stop. Bread, meat, and beer could not be found. 
The people husbanded the little reserve they had, 
but the Spanish soldiers were hungry. Money 
would not purchase food. The wheels of industry 
had all suddenly ceased to hum. Starvation was 
before the army. To say that Alva was angry is to 
speak mildly of his mental state. He was furious. 
One April night, in 1572, he ordered the court ex- 
ecutioners to seize eighteen of Brussels's most re- 
spected tradesmen, and hang them, each before his 
own door, and see if this vengeance would not start 
trade again. That order was never e:^ecuted. That 
night, while Alva least expected it, by the good 
providence of God, the "Beggars of the Sea," with 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 149 

a fleet of tAventy-four ships, fell upon the coast. 
William de la Marck, "a bloodthirsty, savage, law- 
less, and licentious ruffian," commanded. He struck 
at Brill. He easily obtained possession of this 
walled town. His great thought w-as to plunder 
the town; but William de Blois, whose brother Alva 
had murdered, proposed to give this place over to 
AVilliam of Orange. This advice was heeded. The 
word of this success fell upon Alva's ears as omi- 
nous. He ceased the executions, and ordered sol- 
diers to Brill. Ten companies marched from Utrecht. 
The sturdy Brillians, having had a taste of suc- 
cess, were thoroughly aroused. They cut the dikes, 
flooded the country and the city, and burned a 
few transports to keep them from falling into the 
hands of the Spaniards. Defeated, the soldiers of 
Alva retired. The people took an oath to support 
William of Orange. This prince was arranging to 
make an assault on the Spanish at another point, 
but his plans were not complete. 

Louis of Nassau, a younger brother of Orange, 
was a brave patriot, and, next to Coligny, the idol 
of the Huguenots. With a small force, he had 
fallen upon Mons, in Hainault, the southern State 
of the Netherlands, and had captured it. He was 
an ardent, outspoken Christian and Protestant. 
* This occurred in May, 1572. Alva, pushed by his 
losses, called to the States Assembly of Holland to 
meet at The Hague. They met, not at The Hfigue 
and with Alva, but at Dort with William of 



150 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

Orange. A compact was entered into between the 
Assembly of Holland and William, and troops were 
raised at once, to be paid by the cities. On the 
27th of August, 1572, William, at the head of 
24,000 men, began his march toward Mons, to de- 
liver his brother Louis. Everywhere William was 
received by the cities and people with great demon- 
strations of joy. Men came to his standard. All 
was prosperous, and soon, it was hoped, the hated 
Spaniard would be conquered, and swept from the 
States of the Netherlands. Just in this blaze of 
excitement, the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day 
occurred in France. Coligny, the bosom friend of 
William, fell by an assassin's hand. The army 
William hoped to have come to his standard from 
France, now could not be obtained. Elizabeth of 
England had promised aid to the Hollanders, but 
she began to dally with Philip and Alva, hoping to 
gain some benefit for her kingdom in the coming 
crash. 

Alva feared to meet Orange in the field. Mons 
gave up to the Spanish troops. France and Eng- 
land both deserted him. Just as he seemed in the 
moment of greatest success, the blight of darkness 
fell upon him, and hope died. What could he do ? 
His army was disbanded, and Orange went al- 
most alone into Holland, where he might wait, as 
God willed, with becoming endurance and patience. 
Orange believed himself the man of destiny. He 
believed that God designed religious and civil free- 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 151 

dom for him and his people, and he was the man 
to secure them. The Christian Romanist was now a 
Christian Protestant. Toleration, religions liberty, 
civil freedom, were terms he loved to dwell upon, 
for they were words consistent with the eternal truth 
and Avord of God. 

The story of reviving hope, of the defense of 
the cities and homes of Holland, the maintaining of 
a siege for seven months against the combined forces 
of Sj^ain, the cutting of the dikes and flooding of 
the country, the strength and courage of William, 
the power of endurance of himself and people, the 
butchery at Haarlem by the Spanish, after they sur- 
rendered on terms of promised protection, the hero- 
ism of men and women who fought and suffered to 
the last, the recall of Alva, the coming of Don 
Louis de Requesens, Grand Commander of Castile, 
and the tide of victory at Middleburg, as well as on 
the sea, are scenes and incidents vividly drawn by 
the historian, and evidence how much of faith, 
bravery, and courage were required to gain relig- 
ious freedom. The date at which may be set the 
turning point for Netherlandish freedom was Febru- 
ary, 1574. 

Leyden was soon after attacked by Orange, and, 
after a brilliant siege, was taken. Twice the Span- 
ish forces attempted to retake Leyden ; but Orange 
finally, by the flood, rescued the city, and defeated 
the hated Spanish. Here Puritanism found, thirty 
years later, her strongest hold and warmest friends. 



152 A R3IINIA NISM IN SIS TOBY. 

Somehow Leyden became strongly connected with 
the " cause of religion and learning." 

To commemorate this glorious delivery from 
Spanish rule, Orange and the Estates founded the 
University of Leyden. Learning, religion, and 
liberty — here they found a home and a center from 
which to radiate. The University of Leyden was des- 
tined to be a tremendous power for building up and 
maintaining Dutch liberty and Protestant Christian- 
ity. Great names have been connected with the 
LTiiiversity of Leyden. John Van Der Does, the 
first curator; Justus Lipsius, of the chair of His- 
tory ; John Drusus, the Orientalist ; Gomarus, and 
Arminius, the great theologians ; G. J. Yossius, the 
celebrated grammarian ; Peter Paaw, the botanist ; 
Hemsterhuys, the scientific student of Greek ; 
Boerhaave, Albinus, and many others, eminent in 
their several departments, — were great lights at 
Leyden. 

From Catholic France Leyden drew much of 
the Protestant element. She had within herself 
men by the thousands to be led along the blessed 
pathway into the highest realms of learning. By 
this school she was destined to wield an influence 
for two hundred years in the Dutch Republic, that 
should be the pride of the world. 

William of Orange took a j)rominent place in 
Dutch liberty. He was foremost in all the plans 
for her advancement. He could not be corrupted 
by Spanish gold, or promises of the greatest things 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMINIANISM. 153 

in Spanish gift. A price was set upon bis head. 
Assassins were encouraged to kill him. The at- 
tempt was made in 1582, but failed. The terrible 
deed was accomplished, July 10, 1584, by a bullet 
sped by Balthasar Gerard. While Rome and 
Madrid, the pope and Philip rejoiced, and sang the 
Te Bewn, as on the occasion of the base assassina- 
tions of St. Bartholomew's Day in France, the man 
of God, the silent hero, died praying, " God hav^e 
mercy on my poor people." The world lost a man, 
Holland a brave defender, liberty an heroic cham- 
pion, and Christianity a strong support. 

Puritanism did not die with William of Orange, 
as many antagonists hoped. It lived. It realized 
the foe it had still to meet and vanquish. It saw 
the need of a strong arm on which to lean, a deter- 
mining mind, quick to discern, and ready to plan 
for victory, a sharp and active understanding, to 
detect the dissimulation of the basest of foes, as un- 
scrupulous as Satan, and a courage that would not 
quail when facing the vilest of men, and uplift hu- 
manity, and disenthrall the evil. Where should 
such a one be found ? 

Puritanism became strong in the Netherlands. 
Protestanism grew rank by her side. Puritanism 
and Protestantism were not synonymous, nor could 
they be used interchangeably, but they grew so 
near together that they seemed to have common in- 
terests and a common destiny. Determined men 
offered life, fortune, ease, and fomily for the sue- 



154 A BMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

cess of Puritanism and Protestantism. The re- 
sources of this goodly land lay at the feet of these 
two great and essential elements to the grand suc- 
cess of religious and civil liberty. 

The home of Arminianism was within the won- 
derful Netherlands. It had interests in common 
with Puritanism. It was an essential element of 
Protestantism. It sought to have and enjoy civil 
and religious liberty. In Amsterdam and Leyden, 
even in the great Memorial University of William 
of Orange, within nineteen years from the assassi- 
nation of the Silent Man, it was born — born to a 
sturdy life, to a period of trouble, but to vigorous 
thought and an ultimate triumph. 

The Arminians, while denying predestination, 
" proclaimed a practical theory, which was more im- 
portant " to the people than any gone before in the 
struggle to found a republic. ''They claimed that 
in religious matters the State was supreme, that it 
should appoint the ministers, and that it alone 
should have the regulation of Church discipline and 
dogma. This was the doctrine which in the end 
brought King James and the whole High Church 
party of England into the ranks of Arminianism, 
although they fought its theology for many years. 
It was utterly repudiated by the Anabaptists, who 
believed in the separation of Church and State." 
(The Puritan, etc., Vol. II, p. 302.) 

"In 1606, three years after Arminius had be- 
gun his teaching, the new principles had gained 



POLITICAL HOME OF ARMIMIAXISM. 155 

such headway that the clerical party called for a 
National Synod to settle the religious dissensions. 
At this time, it must be borne in mind, Barne- 
veldt was supreme in the States General. The 
municipal Councils, which lay at the foundations 
of the Government, were mostly in favor of the Ar- 
minians, who supported their ecclesiastical preten- 
sions, and believed in giving them more power. 
Above the municipal Councils stood the Assemblies 
of the Provinces, imbued with the same ideas. 
These were the bodies which then controlled the 
situation. Under such conditions Barneveldt de- 
clared openly in favor of a National Synod, thus 
fully recognizing the principle that the Netherlands 
were a nation, with full power to regulate all its 
affairs, despite any parchment treaties of the past." 

Thus is traced the political home of Arminian- 
ism. It became an important factor in the com- 
plete development of the Dutch Republic. It 
even stood by the great principles of nationality. 
It was the strong ally of education, the highest 
culture, the best kind of civil liberty, and perfect 
toleration. It enriched literature. It studied and 
unfolded science. It entered the field of specula- 
tive and constitutional law. It reveled in the 
glories of philosophy. It glorified theology, and 
advocated the religion of the heart. 

God had a mission for Arminianism. He pro- 
posed that it should be carried out. 



Chapter VIII. 

ARMINIANISM IN ITS WBSLEYAN GROWTH. 

AYesleyanism a Eeformation — Samuel AYesley's EeYolt from 
Calvinism— "When John Wesley embraced Arminian- 
ism — Sermon on God's Free Grace— Gropings for Free- 
dom from Predestination in a Letter to his Mother — 
Her Reply — Mr. Wesley's Letter from Wroote— Ser- 
mon — His Eight Reasons for antagonizing Predestina- 
tion — Dialogue of 1741— His Work on "The Scripture 
Doctrine Concerning Predestination''— Four Reasons for 
objecting to Absolute Predestination — Mr. Wesley in 
the Clear Light of God's Love- His Delight to preach 
Arminianism — The Arminian IMagazine — Why estab- 
lished — Why called "Arminian" — Character of the 
Magazine — The First Article on James Arminius — Sep- 
aration between John Wesley and George Whitefield — 
Cause — Whitefield Cah'inistic — Worked together in the 
Kingswoocl School— GroAving Differences— Whitefield 
an Evangelist — Wesley an Organizer — Whitefield be- 
came an Ardent Calvinist by Contact with New Eng- 
land Cahdnists— Whitefield's Letter to Wesley — 
Reply- Whitefield's Letter to Wesley from Cape 
Lopen — Calvinism in America of a Strong Type — 
Letter from Boston on "Sinless Perfection" — Calvin- 
istic Controversy — Howell Harris and his Letters to 
Wesley on Calvinism — Wesley's Replies — Countess of 
Huntingdon — The Whitefieldians as Methodists were 
Calvinistic — Whitefield would not unite with Wesley — 
Whitefield's Death — Wesley's Consistent Movements — 
Arminianism Triumphant. 

The ministers and members of the Scottish 
Church of the middle of the L^st century hated the 
Arminians as much as they did sin and Satan. In 
156 



WESLE YAN ARMINIANISM. 1 5 7 

their eDumeratiou of errors, Arminianism was classed 
along with others considered as the worst. "Do you 
disown all Popish, Arian, Socinian, Arminian, Boii- 
rignon, and other doctrines and tenets and opinions 
whatever, contrary to and inconsistent w^ith the Con- 
fession of Faith ?" asked they. 

The Nonjuring Presbyterians w^ere for years 
called the " Nons." To their creed was added the 
following sharply antagonistic addenda: "I leave 
my protest," says a stern Cameronian, "against all 
sectarian errors, heresies, and blasphemies, partic- 
ularly against Arianism, Erastianism, Socinianism, 
Quakerism, Deism, Bourignonism, Familism, Skep- 
ticism, Arminianism, Lutheranism, Pelagianism, 
Campbellisra, Whitefieldianism, Latitudinarianism, 
and Independency, and all other sects and sorts 
that maintain any error, heresy, or blasphemy that 
is contrary to the Word of God, and all erroneous 
speeches vented from pulpits, pages, or in public or 
private discourses ; and against all toleration 
granted or given, at any time, in favor of these or 
any other errors, heresies or blasphemies, or blas- 
phemous heretics, particularly the toleration granted 
by the sectarian usurper, Oliver Cromwell, the 
Antichristian toleration granted by the popish 
Duke of York, and the present continued tolera- 
tion granted by that wicked Jezebel, the pretended 
Queen, Anne." (From Burton, IX, 60, as quoted 
by Stanley in his Lectures on the Church of Scot- 
laud, p. QQ.) 

11 



158 ARMINIANI8M IN HlSTORt. 

AVesleyan Arminianism was a reformation, and 
was directly antagonistic to all that had been taught 
in the previous years of predestination according 
to the Genevan theory. Mr. Wesley's father, 
though to what extent may not be known, had 
broken away from the rigid doctrines of the earlier 
times. It will be a matter of pleasure and profit 
to follow the mind of Mr. Wesley as he was break- 
ing away from the shackles of the old theology, and 
found in the interpretation of Scripture satisfaction 
to his own mind and heart that Jesus Christ had 
made a sufficient atonement for every ruined son 
of Adam who would come with repentance and 
faith, and seek the pardon of a reconciled God. 

Mr. Wesley came into the full acknowledgment 
of Arminianism at an early period in his ministry ; 
for why should he have crossed the ocean to preach 
the gospel to Indians and those who were destitute 
of religion on this continent if he had not felt it 
possible for those who heard his preaching to turn 
and live ? When he was first an Arminian is a 
question of interest. In his first sermon, in 1738, 
preached at Oxford soon after his conversion, on 
"By grace are ye saved through faith," and in the 
same year a sermon on ''God's Free Grace," he 
taught that "the grace or love of God, whence 
Cometh our salvation, is free in all, and free for all." 

Mr. Wesley's first gropings after freedom from 
predestination are found in a letter to his mother, 
of June 18, 1725, in which he speaks of reading 



WESLEYAi^ ARMINIANISM. 159 

Thomas a Keinpis and Dr. Taylor's ' ' Holy Living 
and Dying." "If we dwell in Christ, and Christ 
in us — which we will not do unless we are regen- 
erate — certainly we must be sensible of it. If we 
can never have any certainty of being in a state 
of salvation, good reason it is that every moment 
should be spent, not in joy, but in fear and trem- 
bling ; and then undoubtedly, in this life, we are 
of all men the most miserable. God deliver us 
from such a fearful expectation as this!" (Tyer- 
man's Life of Wesley, Vol. I, p. 35.) Here Wes- 
ley was feeling after ''God's love to all and the 
privilege of living in a state of conscious salvation." 
His mother wrote, July 21, 1725, a letter touching 
upon this subject, to which he replied, July 29, 
1725: "What shall I say of predestination? An 
everlasting purpose of God to deliver some from 
damnation does, I suppose, exclude all from that 
deliverance who are not chosen. And if it was 
inevitably decreed from eternity that such a de- 
terminate part of mankind should be saved, and 
none besides them, a vast majority of the world 
were only born to eternal death, without so much 
as a possibility of avoiding it. How is this con- 
sistent with either the Divine justice or mercy ? 
Is it merciful to ordain a creature to everlasting 
misery? Is it just to punish man for crimes which 
he could not but commit? That God should be 
the author of sin and injustice (which must, I think, 
be the consequences of maintaining this opinion), 



1 60 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

is a contradiction to the clearest ideas we have of 
the Divine nature and perfections." (Tyerman, 
Vol. I, p. 39.) 

Mr. Wesley was coming out of his intellectual 
conflict into a full view of the weakness of predes- 
tination. While his views on faith were not up 
to the Arminian view, still he was approaching it. 
His mother was a superior counselor. One of her 
greatest letters, and one whose doctrine regarding 
predestination he fully indorsed, was written from 
Wroote, August 18, 1725. In it she says: ''I 
have often wondered that men should be so vain 
as to amuse themselves with searching into the de- 
crees of God, which no human wit can fathom, 
and do not rather employ their time and powers in 
working out their salvation. Such studies tend more 
to confound than to inform the understanding, and 
young people had better let them alone. But 
since I find you have some scruples concerning 
our article ' Of Predestination,' I will tell you my 
thoughts of the matter. . . . The doctrine of 
predestination as maintained by the rigid Calvin- 
ists is very shocking, and ought to be abhorred, 
because it directly charges the Most High God with 
being the author of sin. I think you reason well 
and justly against it; for it is certainly inconsistent 
with the justice and goodness of God to lay any 
man under either a physical or moral necessity of 
committing sin, and then to punish him for doing 
it." (Tyerman, Vol. I, p. 40.) 



WESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 161 

There were prejudices for him to overcome, 
questions arising from early education to be care- 
fully and justly answered, and a new life to be felt 
in his own heart before he could be said to be dis- 
enthralled and breathe the spirit of a really free 
man. But God, by the Holy Spirit, was leading him 
on step by step, over a rough road to the place of 
certainty and satisfaction. 

In 1740, Mr. Wesley delivered a sermon on 
" Free Grace," using for a text, Romans viii, 32, 
which was printed, having annexed Charles Wes- 
ley's '*Hymn on Universal Redemption." In this 
sermon he sharply defines predestination as the 
Calvinists insisted on defining it. ''Free grace in 
all," he said, ''is not free grace for all, but only 
for those whom God hath ordained to life. The 
greater part of mankind God hath ordained to 
death, and it is not free for them. Them God 
hateth, and therefore, before they were born, de- 
creed that they should die eternally. And this he 
absolutely decreed, because it was his sovereign 
will. Accordingly they are born for this, to be de- 
stroyed body and soul in hell. And they grow up 
under the irrevocable curse of God, without any 
possibility of redemption ; for what grace God gives, 
he gives only for this, to increase, not prevent their 
damnation." 

Mr. Wesley then states his reasons for antag- 
onizing the doctrine of predestination : 

"1. It renders all preaching vain ; for preach- 



162 ARMlNIANISSf IN HISTORY. 

ing is needless to them that are elected ; for they, 
whether with it or without it, will infallibly be 
saved. And it is useless to them that are not 
elected; for they, whether with preaching or with- 
out it, will infallibly be damned. 

"2. It directly tends to destroy that holiness 
which is the end of all the ordinances of God; for 
it wholly takes away those first motives to follow 
after holiness, so frequently proposed in Scripture, 
the hope of future reward and fear of punishment, 
the hope of heaven and fear of hell. 

''3. It directly tends to destroy several partic- 
ular branches of holiness ; for it naturally tends to 
inspire or increase a sharpness of temper, which is 
quite contrary to the meekness of Christ, and leads 
a man to treat with contempt or coldness those whom 
he supposes to be outcasts from God. 

"4. It tends to destroy the comfort of religion. 

"5. It directly tends to destroy our zeal for 
good works ; for what avails it to relieve the wants 
of those who are just dropping into eternal fire ? 

"6. It is a direct and manifest tendency to 
overthrow the whole Christian revelation ; for it 
makes it unnecessary. 

''7. It makes the Christian revelation contra- 
dict itself; for it is grounded on such an interpre- 
tation of some texts as flatly contradicts all the 
other texts, and indeed the whole scope and tenor 
of Scripture. 

*'8. It is full of blasphemy; for it represents 



WESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 163 

our blessed Lord as a hypocrite and dissembler, in 
saying one thing and meaning another, in pretend- 
ing a love which he had not ; it also represents the 
most holy God as more false, more cruel, and more 
unjust than the devil ; for, in point of fact, it says 
that God has condemned millions of souls to ever- 
lasting fire for continuing in sin, which, for want of 
the grace he gives them not, they are unable to 
avoid." (Tyerman, Vol. I, p. 319.) 

From this time on Mr. Wesley does not seem to 
have any trouble or question as to the nature and 
character' of Calvinism. He preached against it. 
He warned his followers against its seductive wiles, 
and led many out of the slough of despond to per- 
fect rest and peace. His utterances grew strong 
against predestination. In 1741 he published "A 
Dialogue between a Predestinarian and his Friend," 
in which he showed, "from the writings of Pisca- 
tor, Calvin, Zanchius, and others, that predestina- 
rianism teaches that God causes reprobates to sin, 
and creates them on purpose to be damned." (Tyer- 
man, Vol. I, p. 366.) 

In 1741, Mr. Wesley published two small works 
on predestination — "The Scripture Doctrine Con- 
cerning Predestination, Election, and Reprobation," 
and "Serious Considerations on Absolute Predesti- 
nation." In this last he gave four reasons why 
he objected to the doctrine of absolute predesti- 
nation : 

" 1. Because it makes God the author of sin. 



164 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

" 2. Because it makes Him delight in the death 
of sinners. 

" 3. Because it is highly injurious to Christ, our 
Mediator. 

' ' 4. Because it makes the preaching of the gos- 
pel a mere mockery and illusion." 

John AVesley was now out in the clear light of 
God's love to all sinners, and fully appreciated the 
mission of Christ to fulfill the will of the Father 
with regard to providing a plan whereby all men 
may be placed in a salvable state, and by the exer- 
cise of the will may, "by repentance towards God 
and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ," be 
brought into a personal relation with God as actu- 
ally pardoned and accepted, and receive the assur- 
ance that God is reconciled. These words, as ex- 
pressive of the greatest doctrines of a pure and 
true religion, were often presented and elucidated 
by Mr. Wesley, namely : Justification by faith 
only, repentance, free will. Divine grace, pardon, 
assurance, reconciled, salvation free for all. From 
this time forward it was a source of unbounded de- 
light to preach to sinners, high or low, a free and 
and full salvation from all sin, and declare that 
in the "freedom of the will" lies man's dignity 
and manhood. To all classes, high and cultured, 
low and ignorant, the respectable sinners and the 
vilest outcasts, he preached a Christ for them. 
While in a state of probation they were permitted 
to come to Christ, and enter the fold and be 



WESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 165 

saved. Thousands of sinners, hearing this great 
doctrine of Christ as preached by Wesley and his 
preachers, which was true Arminianism, bowed be- 
fore the Savior in repentance, and by faith received 
him into the heart, and arose new creatures. The 
preaching of Christ after the Arminian doctrine 
brought to England the greatest and most thorough 
revival it ever knew. 

The Arminian Magazine. 

Mr. Wesley, after long and critical study and 
the constant preaching of Arminianism, determined 
to establish a magazine which should regularly 
appeal' as an auxiliary to him in fulfilling his 
mission to men. To this magazine he gave the 
name of ** Arminian," in honor of that great divine 
of Holland, James Arminius. According to Tyer- 
man's life, Vol. Ill, August 14, 1777, Mr. Wesley 
drew up his proposal "for a magazine to be issued 
for the benefit of the Methodists." The heading is 
unique; namely, ^^ The Arminian Magazine: Con- 
sisting of Extracts and Original Treatises on Uni- 
versal Redemption." 

In the first and second paragraphs he sets forth 
what had been published in the Christian Maga- 
zine, in the Spiritual Magazine, and the Gospel 
Magazine, that Christ did not die for all, but for 
one in ten, for the elect only. He then says : " This 
comfortable doctrine, the sum of which, proposed 
in plain English, is, God before the foundation of 



166 AEMIJVIANIS3I IN HISTOR Y. 

the world absolutely and irrevocably decreed that 
* some men shall be saved, do what they will, and the 
rest be damned, do what they can,' has by these 
tracts been distributed throughout the land with the 
utmost diligence. And these champions of it have, 
from the beginning, proceeded in a manner worthy 
of their cause. They have paid no more regard to 
good nature, decency, or good manners, than to 
reason or truth. All these they set utterly at 
defiance. AVithout any deviations from their plan, 
they have defended their dear decrees with argu- 
ments worthy of Bedlam, and with language worthy 
of Billingsgate." 

In his third paragraph he gives the character of 
his proposed magazine. ' ' In the Arminian Maga- 
zine a very different opinion will be defended in a 
very different manner. AVe maintain that God 
willeth all men to be saved, by speaking the truth 
in love, by arguments and illustrations drawn 
partly from the Scripture, partly from reason ; pro- 
posed in as inoffensive a manner as the nature of 
the thing will permit. Not that we expect those on 
the other side of the question will use us as we use 
them. Yet we hope nothing will move us to re- 
turn evil for evil, or, however provoked, to render 
railing for railing." 

In paragraph 5 he tells us what shall be the 
first article in the magazine. "We know nothing 
more proper to introduce a work of this kind than 
a sketch of the life and death of Arminius, a per- 



WESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 167 

son with whom those who mention his name with 
the utmost indignity are commonly quite unac- 
quainted, of whom they know no more than 
Hermes Trismegistus." (Tyerman's Life of Wes- 
ley, Vol. Ill, pp. 281, 282.) 

Separation Between John AYesley and 

George Whitefield. . 

What was the cause of the separation between 
these two great lights in Methodism, John Wesley 
and George Whitefield ? AVhen did it occur ? These 
two master minds were members of the Holy Club 
at Oxford, often met as the years went by, seemed 
to maintain the warmest attachment for years, 
preached in the same open fields and to the same 
crowds, rejoiced together in the conversion of the 
same souls, but after a time separated and walked 
different paths, and sought to build up diflferent de- 
nominations. In 1739, when at London, the prop- 
erty designed for the use of the society of Meth- 
odists was purchased, it was deeded to trustees. 
Debts occurred by the mismanagement of the trus- 
tees, and the burden fell on Mr. Wesley. Mr. 
Whitefield refused to aid in the liqudation of the 
debt so long as the title was in trustees ; but if Mr. 
Wesley held the title, he and others would seek to 
obtain the funds to pay the debt and complete the 
chapel. Mr. Whitefield said if the deed remains 
in the trustees, unless Mr. AVesley preaches to suit 
them they may at any moment, and for any pre- 



168 ARMINIA NISM IN HISTOR Y. 

tense, shut up the building and bar out Mr. Wes- 
ley. After a full and free discussion of the sub- 
ject the trustees conveyed the title to Mr. Wesley, 
who held it until, by his famous " Deed of Declara- 
tion," he conveyed all his interests in the church 
property to the Legal Hundred, who constitute the 
"Methodist Wesleyan Conference." 

At this time there was the most perfect harmony 
existing between Wesley and Whitefield. They 
had labored together in the founding of the Kings- 
wood School. They had collected and given money 
to carry it forward. Together they had labored for 
the salvation of the wicked Kingswood colliers, and 
to all appearances their hearts were knit together 
like those of David and Jonathan. 

There were already marked differences between 
these two men. Mr. Wesley was the logician and 
great organizer. His gigantic mind and warm 
heart reached out to all men, and discovered forces 
latent, but ready to be brought into active exercise. 
He readily discovered how men might be organized 
to accomplish the will of God. He was a fair ora- 
tor, but always a clear, sound thinker. Mr. White- 
field was an impulsive man, a splendid orator, as 
full of passion and feeling as a human heart could 
be. He had a splendid voice, and could speak to 
thousands as well as to hundreds. His oratory 
was the greatest of the world. He played with hu- 
man emotions as readily as a child will play with 
its mother's apron-strings. He was neither a logi- 



WESLEYAN ARMINIAJSflSM. 169 

cian nor organizer. He possessed a vivid imagina- 
tion, and could plan for the millions, but he could 
not execute. 

"Up to the time of Whitefield's visit to Amer- 
ica," says Tyerman, "he and the Wesleys had la- 
bored in union and harmony without entering into 
the discussion of particular opinions ; but now, 
across the Atlantic, Whitefield became acquainted 
with a number of godly Calvinist ministers, who rec- 
ommended to him the writings of the Puritan di- 
vines, which he read with great avidity, and, as 
a consequence, soon embraced their sentiments." 
(Tyerman, Vol. I, p. 312.) 

Mr. Whitefield was of such a disposition that 
he must communicate to Mr. Wesley the change 
that had occurred in his mind. His letter of July 
2, 1739, from Gloucester to Mr. Wesley, has a 
plaint of sorrow because Mr. Wesley .does not hold 
and advocate predestination. "Dear, honored Sir," 
writes Whitefield, "if you have any regard for the 
peace of the Church, keep in your sermon on Pre- 
destination. But you have cast a lot." With this 
letter Whitefield evidenced how fully his heart was 
set on rescuing Mr. Wesley from the error of Ar- 
mininism, as he thought it to be. " O, my heart," 
writes he, "in the midst of ray body, is like melted 
wax." 

To this Mr. Wesley wrote, firmly opposing the 
doctrine of election, and setting forth the privilege 
of Christians to know that they are saved " en- 



170 ARMINIANISM IN HI8T0R Y, 

tirely from sin in its proper sense, and from com- 
mitting it." 

Mr. Wbitefield soon went to America the second 
time. He carried his ardent desire for the integ- 
rity of Calvinism with him, and advocated it al- 
most continuously. Whitefield addressed a letter 
to Wesley from Savannah, Ga., March 26, 1740. 
In^it he said: ''For once hearken to a child, who 
is willing to wash your feet. ... If possible, 
I am ten thousand times more convinced of the doc- 
trine of election and the final perseverance of those 
that are truly in Christ, than when I saw you last. 
You think otherwise. Why, then, should we dis- 
pute, when there is no probability of convincing ?" 
Whitefield knew enough of Mr. Wesley and his 
firmness when convinced of the right to know how 
improbable it was. that he would be able to con- 
vince Mr. Wesley, and change his belief. But, 
May 24, 1740, Mr. Whitefield wrote again to Mr. 
Wesley, dating his letter from Cape Lopen : ' ' Hon- 
ored Sir," he wrote, " I can not entertain prejudices 
against your conduct and principles any longer 
without imploring you. The more I examine the 
writings of the most experienced men, and the ex- 
perience of the most established Christians, the 
more I differ from your notion about not commit- 
ting sin, and your denying the doctrines of election 
and final perseverance of the saints. I dread com- 
ing to England, unless you are resolved to oppose 
these truths with less warmth than when I was there 



1VESLEYAN ARMINIANISM. 171 

last. . . . God himself teaches, my friend, 
the doctrine of election. . . . Perhaps I may 
never see you again till we meet in judgment ; 
then, if not before, you will know that sovereign, 
distinguishing, irresistible grace brought you to 
heaven. Then will you know that God loved you 
with an everlasting love." (Tyerman, Vol. I, 
P-314.) 

Whitefield revealed an historic fact in his letters 
to Wesley, that in America at that time there was 
only known and preached the hardest and harsh- 
est kind of Calvinism. The preaching of Cotton 
Mather, Increase Mather, the Edwardses, and others, 
had saturated the American mind with Calvinism 
the entire length of the Atlantic coast, and settled 
the people into the habit of an unrighteous intol- 
erance. 

Not content with sending epistles to Mr. Wes- 
ley, Whitefield wrote to others to prejudice them 
against his former warm friend and well-wisher. To 
Mr. James Hutton he writes: "For Christ's sake, 
desire dear Brother Wesley to avoid disputing with 
me. I think I had rather die than see a division 
between us ; and yet how can we walk together if 
we oppose each other?" (Tyerman, Vol. I, p. 315.) 
On the 25th of June, 1740, Whitefield wrote from 
Savannah, Georgia, to Wesley, using this language : 
"For Christ's sake, if possible, never speak against 
election in your sermons." In all of Mr. White- 
field's letters there was not offered a single argument 



172 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

to substantiate the doctrine of election or reproba- 
tion. His were mere assertions, and declarations of 
sorrow that Mr. Wesley did not believe as he. But, 
so far as can be discovered, this noble English Ar- 
minian did not reply until August 9, 1740, when 
he wrote to Mr. Whitefield : ' ' My Dear Brother, — 
I thank you for yours of May 24th. The case is 
quite plain. There are bigots both for predestina- 
tion and against it. God is sending a message to 
these on either side. But neither will receive it, 
unless from one who is of their own opinion. There- 
fore, for a time, you are suffered to be of one opin- 
ion, and I of another. But when His time is come, 
God wnll do what man can not ; namely, make us 
of one mind. Then persecution will flame out, and 
it will be seen whether we count our lives dear unto 
ourselves, so that we may finish our course with 
joy." (Tyerman, Vol. I, p. 316.) 

Two letters came to Mr. Wesley, one from 
Charlestown, South Carolina, August 25, 1740, in 
which Mr. Whitefield modified somewhat his ardor 
against Mr. Wesley, and admits that "perhaps 
the doctrines of election and of final perseverance 
have been abused ; but, notwithstanding, they are 
children's bread, and ought not to be withheld from 
them, supposing they are always mentioned with 
proper cautions against the abuse of them." (Tyer- 
man, Vol. I, p. 316.) 

The second letter was dated Boston, September 
25, 1740. After criticising Mr. Wesley as to "sin- 



WESLE YAN A R MINI A NISM. 173 

less perfection," concerning which Mr. Whitefield 
had distorted notions, he says: "Besides, dear Sir, 
what a fond conceit it is to cry up perfection, and 
to cry down the doctrine of final perseverance ! But 
this and many other absurdities you will run into, 
because you will not own election, because you can 
not own it without believing the doctrine of repro- 
bation. What, then, is there in reprobation so hor- 
rid ? I see no blasphemy in holding that doctrine, 
if rightly explained. If God might have passed by 
all, he may pass by some. Judge whether it is not 
a greater blasphemy to say, ' Christ died for souls 
now in hell.' " (Tyerman, Vol. I, p. 317.) 

The Calvinistic controversy grew with the years, 
and caused many heart-burnings. In Wales the 
work of the Methodist societies went on under the 
direction of Rev. Howell Harris, a man of great 
power and unusual spirituality. When the contro- 
versy came on, he took the side of Calvinism, and 
opposed Mr. Wesley and his Arminian views. His 
letters to Mr. Wesley were of a very severe charac- 
ter, and, when read in the light of history, evince a 
mistaken man. In his letter of July 16, 1740, to 
Mr. Wesley, he says: "I hope I shall contend, with 
my last breath and blood, that it is owing to special, 
distinguishing, and irresistible grace that those that 
are saved, are saved. O that you would not touch 
on this subject till God enlighten you ! My dear 
brother, being a public person, you grieve God's 
people by your opposition to electing love ; and 
12 



174 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

many poor souls believe your doctrine simply be- 
cause you hold it. All this arises from the preju- 
dices of your education, your books, your compan- 
ions, and the remains of your carnal reason. The 
more I write, the more I love you. I am sure you 
are one of God's elect, and that you act honestly 
according to the light you have." (Tyerman, Vol. 
I, p. 315.) 

Mr. Wesley desired to retain Mr. Harris, but 
his course was such as to render this impossible. 
January 5 and 6, 1743, he gathered the societies 
of Wales into a sort of compact on the Calvinistic 
basis, Whitefield and other clergymen being present, 
and after the death of Countess Huntingdon, in 
1791, they became the Welsh Calvinistic Meth- 
odists. 

The Countess of Huntingdon was a very relig- 
ious woman, who admired the earnest preaching of 
Mr. Wesley and Mr. Whitefield. Mr. Wesley was 
of too independent a turn of mind to be led by her, 
but Mr. Whitefield w^as taken *' under her special 
patronage." When, on his return from America, he 
began to preach Calvinism, she embraced that doc- 
trine with all her heart. In some manner she con- 
ceived that Wesley denied "justification by faith, 
and insisted upon the saving merit of works," a con- 
clusion which she arrived at without the slightest 
shadow of a foundation. Mr. Wesley was called 
upon to recant, when he had nothing to recant. 
Now, Mr. Shirley, a relative of the countess, and 



WESLUYAN ARMINIANISM. 175 

Mr. Toplady, antagonized AVesley, being leading 
defenders of Calvinism. The controversy ran high. 
The countess and Mr. Wesley parted, never to meet 
again on earth. It was long years of feeling against 
Mr. Wesley that Lady Huntingdon lived before her 
mind was disabused of its error regarding him, and 
she came to look upon him as a man of God. 

Mr. Whitefield possessed no organizing power, 
and so did not organize a Church or found a 
sect. The Countess, a woman of more than ordi- 
nary ability, undertook the work, and succeeded in 
founding a sect, which might have been known as 
Whitefieldian Methodists, but were called "The 
Countess of Huntingdon's Connection." At her 
own house, preaching and religious services were 
often held, and people of the upper classes attended, 
and many were spiritually benefited. She built 
many chapels in London and other parts of Eng- 
land, and even in Scotland. The college founded 
at Trevecca, in Wales, and afterwards moved to 
Cheshunt, Herts, was for the education of ministers, 
and accomplished good. She became the sole ex- 
ecutrix of the will of George Whitefield, on his 
death in 1777. 

After the death of Mr. Whitefield, the Calvin- 
istic Methodists separated into three sects. 1. 
The Lady Huntingdon Connection, which "ob- 
served strictly the liturgical forms of the Estab- 
lished Church, with a settled pastorate." 2. The 
Tabernacle Connection, or Whitefield Methodists 



176 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

who, having no bond of connection after his death, 
drifted into Congregationalism and Independency. 
3. The Welsh Calvinistic Methodists, who continue 
quite thrifty unto the present, but because of their 
strong Calvinistic belief affiliate more with the 
Presbyterians than with the Methodists. 

Coming back to the relations between Mr. Wes- 
ley and Mr. Whitefield, we will find that, after the 
first severe outburst of feeling and antagonism to- 
wards Mr. Wesley because he would not favor the 
doctrine of predestination, Mr. Whitefield began to 
modify his spirit, and write as though he desired 
union. In 1744, Mr. Whitefield went to America, 
where he remained until 1748. 

In October, 1746, Whitefield wrote to Wesley 
a letter which evinced the dawning of a desire to 
bury their theological differences. "The regard I 
have always had for you and your brother," wrote 
Whitefield, " is still as great as ever, and I trust we 
shall give this and future ages an example of true 
Christian love abiding, notwithstanding diflferences 
in judgment. Why our Lord has permitted us to 
differ as to some points of doctrine will be dis- 
covered on the last day." 

During the year 1747, Mr. Wesley wrote to 
Whitefield regarding a union of the societies of 
Methodism. To this Mr. Whitefield replied, Sep- 
tember 11, 1747 : *'My heart is ready for an out- 
ward as well as an inward union. Nothing shall be 
wanting on my part to bring it about ; but I can not 



WESLE YAN A RMINIA NISM. 177 

see how it can possibly be efi'ected till we all speak 
and think the same things. ... As for universal re- 
demption, if we omit on each side the talking for or 
against reprobation, as we may fairly do, and agree, 
as we already do, in giving an universal offer to all 
poor sinners that will come and taste of the water 
of life, I think we may manage very well." 

In 1748, after four years' residence in Amer- 
ica, Whitefield landed again in England. He 
found many changes, and some of them greatly to 
his disadvantage. September 1st he wrote to Wes- 
ley from London regarding the union: " What 
have you thought about a union? 1 am afraid an 
external one is impracticable. I find, by your ser- 
mons, that we differ in principles more than I 
thought, and I believe we are upon two different 
plans." Whitefield found, on visiting Scotland, that 
he was not so great a favorite as in earlier times. 
On reaching Edinburgh, he found his old friends, the 
Seceders, "met to adopt the new-modeled scheme 
and covenant." ''Hundreds took the oath, and 
solemnly engaged to use all lawful means to extir- 
pate, not only popery, prelacy, Arminianism, Arian- 
ism, Tri theism and Sabellianism," but also "George 
Whitefieldism ;" and " similar decisions were adopted 
at the Synods of Lothian, Ayr, and Glasgow." 
(Tyerman, Vol. H, p. 23.) 

Since Whitefield determined to be an evangelist 
in general, and not establish societies, and Mr. Wes- 
ley w^as at work founding societies from one end of 



178 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

England to the other, as well as evangelizing the 
whole country, there was little need for the opin- 
ions of these men to come in conflict. Hence we 
find there was a union of heart, even when there 
was no union of societies. 

From this time forward, in the hearts of these 
noble men of God, only love and true fellowship 
abode. They had little or nothing to say to each 
other of their doctrinal differences. They lived as 
devout Christians, striving after the mastery as sons 
of God. 



Chapter IX. 

SCHOI.ARS OF ARMINIANISM. 

Scholars of English and American Arminianism — Misunder- 
standing of the Arminian Controversy by many Ger- 
man Authors — Kurtz and his Church History — Armin- 
ianism never advocated Latitudinarianism — Arminian- 
ism has had Worthy Scholars — Arminian Systematic 
Theology — Fletcher — Benson's Description of Fletcher — 
Fletcher and the Quinquarticular Controversy — State- 
ment of Arminianism — Answer to Toplady — God's Per- 
fections honored in Arminianism — Closing Statements 
of the Equal Check — Essays on Bible Calvinism and 
Bible Arminianism — Sample of Fletcher's Style — Eich- 
ard Watson — Theological Institutes — Wm, B. Pope — 
His Christian Theology — Dr. Adam Clarke — Clarke's 
Commentaries — Miner Raymond — D. D. Whedon — Free- 
dom of the Will — Wilbur Fisk — Calvinistic Contro- 
versy — The Metaphysical Theory of Dr. Hopkins — New 
England Calvinism startled by ' ' Calvinism Improved ' ' — 
New Divinity of New England — Four Conclusions. 

One of the most astonishing things in the dis- 
cussion of the Arminian controversy is the appar- 
ent misunderstanding by some modern German, as 
well as other writers, of what Arminianism was as 
taught by Arminius, Episcopius, Grotius, and Lim- 
borch. Such a writer as Kurtz, in his Church His- 
tory, talks about the doctrine of Arminius finding 
''expression in latitudinarianism, and, still worse, 
in Deism." He links Arminian doctrine to the Deism 
of Edward, Lord Herbert, of Cherbury, who " re- 

179 



180 A RMINIANISM IN HIST OB Y. 

duced religion to five points : Belief in God ; ob- 
ligation to honor him ; an upright life ; expiation 
of sin by sincere repentance ; retribution in eternal 
life;" and to Thomas Hobbes, who "regarded 
Christianity as an Oriental phantom, only of impor- 
tance as a support of absolute royalty, and as an 
antidote against revolution." (See Kurtz, Church 
History, Vol. II, section 40, and section 42.) He 
also charges that James Arminius "became more 
and more convinced that the dogma of an absolute 
predestination was antiscriptural, but wandered 
into Pelagian paths." He also claims that the Five 
Articles presented by the Remonstrants to the 
States in 1610, "set forth a carefully-restricted 
semi-Pelagianism." (Kurtz, Vol. II, section 40.) 
At no time or place was Arminianism connected 
with, under the control of, or advocated by latitudi- 
narians or Deists. These were not necessarily the 
outgrowth of Arminianism, but were evolved from 
the direct revolt of the human heart from the com- 
mands of God to a righteous and holy life, and the 
pardon of sin for the merit of the atonement in 
Jesus Christ. It is a thing beyond comprehension 
how so discerning minds in most matters can be so 
utterly misled when they attempt to speak of Ai*- 
minianism, and declare the connection between its 
doctrines and those so marked in their opposition 
to the essential principles set forth by Arminius, 
Episcopius, Grotius, Limborch, and many other em- 
inent and scholarly men. 



SCHOLARS OF AR3IINIANISM. 181 

Arminianism has had worthy scholars and 
writers, who have thought over and through the 
great problems of Arminianism, and have con- 
structed admirable and complete works in Armin- 
ian systematic theology. They have grappled 
the subject in all its phases, have seen how and 
when it was possible to construct a system of the- 
ology that should reasonably and fully explain 
the mystery of texts of Scripture that were in 
controversy, remove from many minds the doubt 
and gloom that resulted from considering the pas- 
sages so prominently urged by the Calvinists, and 
have encouraged believing souls to look out upon 
a bright and glorious future life, which they may 
know as a certainty to-day. There are commenta- 
tors of Arminian faith who have patiently and 
faithfully gone over the entire Word of God, and 
found reasonable and logical explanation of the 
Book of God. They have brought great comfort 
to human hearts by flooding light upon dark 
places. It is our purpose now to inquire as to 
some of these men and their works. 

Eev. John William Fletcher, the Vicar of 
Madeley, was born at Nyon, Vaud, Switzerland, 
September 12, 1729. His family was very much dis- 
tinguished. He was highly educated, being ''mas- 
ter of the French, German, Latin, Hebrew, and 
Greek languages, which he had learned in France;" 
but "his theological and philosophical education 
was acquired at Geneva," even amid the teachings 



182 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORY. 

of Calvinism. While his parents desired him to 
enter the ministry, he was determined to be a sol- 
dier, and gain distinction on the field of blood. 
He entered the army of Portugal as a captain. 
Soon afterwards peace was made with England, 
and his occupation as a soldier suddenly ended. 
He next went to England as a tutor. Here he 
came in contact with the rising Methodist societies, 
and in 1755 united with them. In 1757 he was 
ordained, in the Church of England, a priest. He 
was first rector at Dunham, and afterwards at 
Madeley. He became a model pastor, full of zeal 
and the Holy Ghost, and looked after all the in- 
terests of his people, both spiritually and intellect- 
ually. The description of Mr. Fletcher from the 
graceful pen of Benson presents him as one of na- 
ture's noblemen. "The reader," says Mr. Benson, 
in describing Fletcher at Trevecca, " will pardon 
me if he thinks I exceed ; my heart kindles while 
I write. Here it was that I saw, shall I say an 
angel in human flesh? I should not far exceed 
the truth if I said so. But here I saw a descendant 
of fallen Adam so fully raised above the ruins of 
the fall, that, though by the body he was tied down 
to earth, yet was his whole conversation in heaven, 
yet was his life from day to day hid with Christ in 
God. Prayer, praise, love and zeal, all ardent, 
elevated above what one would think attainable in 
this state of frailty, were the elements in which he 
continually lived. Languages, arts, sciences, gram- 



SCHOLARS OF ARMINIANISM. 183 

mar, rhetoric, logic, even divinity itself, as it is 
called, were all laid aside when he appeared in the 
school-room among the students; and they seldom 
hearkened long before they were all in tears, and 
every heart caught fire from the flame that burned 
in his soul." 

Mr. Fletcher entered heartily into the great 
'* Quinquarticular" or Calvinistic discussion. His 
*' Checks to Antinomianism," in a clear and for- 
cible manner, advocated the Arminian view of pre- 
destination and the plan of salvation, in an unan- 
swerable argument. "They comprehend nearly 
every important thesis on the subject." They treat 
of "the highest philosophical questions, theories 
of freedom of the will, prescience, and fatalism." 
These were admirably and skillfully presented. 
No writer has better balanced the apparently con- 
tradictory passages of Scripture on these questions. 
The popular argument has never, perhaps, been 
more effectively drawn out. No polemical work of 
a former age is so extensively circulated as these 
"Checks." 

Mr. Fletcher's statement of Arminianism is as 
follows: "The second covenant, then, or the gospel, 
is a dispensation of free grace and mercy (not only 
to little children, of whom is the kingdom of 
heaven, but also) to poor, lost, helpless sinnefB, 
who, seeing and feeling themselves condemned by 
the law (of innocence) and utterly unable to ob- 
tain justification upon the terms of the first cove- 



184 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

nant, come to (a merciful God through) Jesus Christ 
(the light of men according to the helps afforded 
them by the dispensation which they are under) to 
seek in him (and from him those merits and) that 
righteousness which they have not in themselves. 
For the Son of God, being both God and man in 
one person, and, by the invaluable sacrifice of him- 
self upon the cross, having suffered the punishment 
due to all our breaches of the law (of works), and 
by his most holy life having answered all the de- 
mands of the first covenant, 'God can be just, 
and the justifier of him that believes in Jesus.' 
Therefore, if a sinner, whose mouth is stopped, and 
who has nothing to pay, pleads from the heart 
the atoning blood of Christ (and supposing he 
never heard that precious name, if according to 
his light he implores Divine mercy, for the free 
exercise of which Christ's blood has made way), 
not only God will not * deliver him to the torment- 
ors,' but will frankly forgive him all." (Fletcher's 
Works, Vol. I, p. 454.) 

Mr. Fletcher answers Mr. Toplady, who says, 
" Arminianism paves the way for atheism by de- 
spoiling the Divine Being of his unlimited suprem- 
acy," after the following manner:' "No, it only 
teaches us that it is absurd to make God's suprem- 
acy bear an undue proportion to his other perfec- 
tions. Do we despoil the king of his manly shape, 
because we deny his having the head of a giant 
and the body of a dwarf? . . . God wisely 



SCHOLARS OF ARMINIANIS3L 185 

made free agents, that he might wisely jiKlge them 
according to their works ; and it is one of our ob- 
jections to the modern doctrines of grace, that they 
despoil God of his wisdom in both these re- 
spects. . . . God does whatever pleases him 
in heaven, earth, and hell. But reason and Scrip- 
ture testify that he does not choose to set his invin- 
cible power against his unerring wisdom, by over- 
powering, with saving grace or damning wrath, 
the men whom he is going judicially to reward or 
punish. . . . When we say that the promised 
reward which a general bestows upon a soldier for 
his gallant behavior in the field, depends in some 
measure upon the soldier's gallant behavior, do we 
despoil the general of his independency with re- 
spect to the soldier? Must the general, to show 
himself independent, necessitate some of his sol- 
diers to fight, that he may foolishly promote them ; 
and others to desert that he may blow their brains 
out with Calvinian independence? When we as- 
sert that God justifies men according to their faith, 
and rewards them according to their good works ; or 
when we say that he condemns them according to 
their unbelief, and punishes them according to 
their bad works ; do we intimate that he betrays the 
least degree of mutability ? On the contrary, do we 
not hereby represent him as faithfully executing his 
eternal, immutable decree of judging and treating 
men according to their works of faith or of unbe- 
lief?" (Fletcher's Works, Vol. n, pp. 228, 229.) 



186 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

Thus he shows in the fullest sense that Armin- 
ianism "secures to God the honor of his perfec- 
tions," and "maintains that free will is dependent 
on free grace." He further shows that Arminians 
"maintain that God, in his infinite wisdom and 
power, has made free agents, in order to display his 
goodness by rewarding them if they believe and 
obey, or his justice by punishing them if they 
prove faithless and disobedient. Whichsoever of the 
two therefore comes to pass, God is no more ' dis- 
concerted, disappointed, embarrassed,' etc., than a 
lawgiver and judge who acquits or condemns crim- 
inals according to his own law and to their own 
works. (Fletcher, Vol. II, pp. 229-236.) 

In closing the Equal Check, Fletcher gives six 
conclusions founded upon Scripture which clearly 
show the manner in which Arminianism esteems 
"grace and justice:" "(1) That as God is both 
a Benefactor and Governor, a Savior and Judge, he 
has both a throne of grace and a throne of justice. 
(2) That those believers are highly partial who wor- 
ship only before one of the divine thrones, when 
the sacred oracles so loudly bid us to pay our hom- 
age before both. (3) That the doctrines of grace 
are the statutes and decrees issuing from the former. 
(4) That the principle of all the doctrines of grace 
is, that there is an election of grace ; and that the 
principle of all the doctrines of justice is, that 
there is an election of justice. (5) That the former 
of those elections is unconditional and partial, as 



SCHOLARS OF ARMINIANISM. 187 

depending merely on the good pleasure of our gra- 
cious Benefactor and Savior ; and that the latter of 
these elections is conditional and impartial, as de- 
pending merely on the justice and equity of our 
righteous Governor and Judge; for justice ad- 
mits of no partiality, and equity never permits 
a ruler to judge any men but such as are free 
agents, or to sentence any free agent otherwise 
than according to his own Avorks. (6) That 
the confounding or not properly distinguishing 
those two elections, and the reprobations which 
they draw after them, has filled the Church with 
confusion, and is the grand cause of the disputes 
which destroy our peace. To restore peace to the 
Church, these two elections must be fixed upon 
their proper Scriptural basis." (Fletcher's Works, 
Vol. II, p. 296.) 

His two essays, the first on ^' Bible Calvinism, 
displaying the doctrines of partial grace, the cap- 
ital error of the Pelagians and the excellency of 
Scripture Calvinism ;" the second on " Bible Armin- 
ianism, displaying the doctrines of impartial justice, 
the capital error of the Calvinists, and the excel- 
lence of Scripture Arminiauism," are perhaps "the 
most impartial, judicious, and eloquent balancing 
of the two systems to be found in the English lan- 
guage." (See Fletcher's Works, Vol. II, pp. 302- 
345.) 

As a sample of Fletcher's use of language in 
polemic discussion, let us take this : " Kigid Calvin- 



188 ARMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR 7. 

ism will be lost in Bible Arminianism, and rigid 
Arminianism will be lost in Bible Calvinism, as soon 
as Protestants will pay a due regard to the follow- 
ing truths : (1) God, for Christ's sake, dissolved, 
with respect to us, the paradisaical covenant of in- 
nocence, when he turned man out of a forfeited 
paradise into this cursed world, for having broken 
that covenant. Then it was that man's Creator 
first became his Redeemer ; then mankind were 
placed under the first mediatorial covenant of prom- 
ise. Then our Maker gave to Adam, and to all 
human species, which was in Adam's loins, a Savior, 
who was called ' The Seed of Woman, the Lamb 
slain from the foundation of the world,' who was to 
make the paradisaical covenant honorable by a sin- 
less obedience. (2) Accordingly, Christ, by the 
grace of God, tasted death for every man ; purchas- 
ing for all men the privileges of a general covenant 
of grace, which God made with Adam and rati- 
fied to Noah, the second general parent of mankind. 
(3) Christ, according to the peculiar predestina- 
tion and election of God, peculiarly tasted death 
for the Jews, his first chosen nation and peculiar 
people; purchasing for them all the privileges of 
the peculiar covenant of grace, which the Scriptures 
call the Old Covenant of Peculiarity. (4) That 
Christ, according to the most peculiar predestina- 
tion and election of God, most peculiarly tasted 
death for the Christians, his second chosen nation 
and most peculiar people ; procuring for them the 



SCHOLARS OF ARMINIANISM. 189 

invaluable privileges of his own most precious Gos- 
pel, ' by which he has brought life and immortality 
to meridian light,' and has richly supplied the de- 
fects of the Noachian and Mosaic dispensations ; 
the first of which is noted for its darkness, and the 
second for its veils and shadows. And lastly, that 
with respect to these peculiar privileges, Christ is 
said to have peculiarly ' given himself for the 
Christian Church, that he might cleanse it with the 
baptismal washing of water by the Word ' (Ephe- 
sians v, 26) ; peculiarly ' purchasing it with his 
blood' (Acts, XX, 28); and delivering it from hea- 
thenish darkness and Jewish shadows, that it might 
be 'redeemed from all iniquity,' and that his Chris- 
tian people might be ' a peculiar people to himself, 
zealous of good works,' even above the Jews, who 
* fear God,' and the Gentiles, who ' work righteous- 
ness.'" (Fletcher's Works, Vol. II, pp. 339-340.) 
Richard Watson may be called the father of 
Methodist systematic theology constructed on the 
Arminian basis. He was born at Barton-on-Hum- 
ber, Lincolnshire, February 22, 1781. "Wild and 
impetuous in youth, feeble in body but precocious 
in mind, he sought an education, and, though un- 
able to pursue a full course, he succeeded by his 
own efforts in becoming a well-educated man. Con- 
verted when thirteen, and preaching at fifteen years 
of age, he started upon a career of usefulness des- 
tined to bring glory and honor, together with doc- 
trinal stability, to the Church. As a man, Richard 
13 



190 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

Watson was one of the most conspicuous in Wes- 
leyan Methodism at the beginning of the present 
century. He was a man of genius in several lines. 
His mind was versatile. So great were his attain- 
ments that contemporaries of other communities and 
beliefs spoke in the highest terms of him. Says 
Robert Hall: 'He soars into regions of thought 
where no genius but his own can penetrate.' The 
London Quarterly Review said : ' Watson had not the 
earnestness and force of Chalmers, but he possessed 
much more thought, philosophy, calm ratiocination, 
and harmonious fullness. He had not, perhaps, the 
metaphysical subtilty and rapid combination, the 
burning affections and elegant diction of Hall, but 
he possessed as keen a reason, a more lofty imag- 
ination, an equal or superior power of painting, 
and, we think, a much more vivid perception of 
the spiritual world and a richer leaven of evan- 
gelical sentiment.'" 

Such was the man whose heart was fired with 
love for all mankind, whose mind was broad enough 
to comprehend the teaching of the apostle, that 
Jesus Christ suffered death for all mankind, and 
the words of Jesus that " God so loved the world 
that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever 
believeth on him should not perish, but have ever- 
lasting life," and who had the courage of his con- 
victions to teach this theology in a strong, scientific, 
masterly manner. His ''Theological Institutes" is 
a "view of the evidences, doctrines, morals, and in- 



SCHOLARS OF ABMINIANISM. 191 

stitutions of Christianity. " It was designed to be 
a "book of Christianity," adapted to the present 
state of theological literature, neither Calvinistic 
on the one hand, nor Pelagian on the other. In 
the " advertisement" to the London edition of 1823 
the author says: "The object has been to follow 
a course of plain and close argument on the vari- 
ous subjects discussed, without any attempt at em- 
bellishment of style, and without adding practical 
uses and reflections, which, while however impor- 
tant, did not fall within the plan of this publica- 
tion." "The various controversies on fundamen- 
tal and important points have been introduced ; 
but it has been the sincere aim of the author to dis- 
cuss every subject with fairness and candor, and 
honestly, but in the spirit of the Truth, which he 
more anxiously wishes to be taught than to teach, to 
exhibit what he believes to be the sense of the Holy 
Scriptures, to whose authority, he trusts, he has 
unreservedly subjected all his own opinions." 

Mr. Watson devotes 467 pages to the treatment 
of the question of the " doctrines relating to man." 
The work is exhaustive. It shows the most exten- 
sive reading of Calvinistic and Arminian literature, 
together with heathen philosophy, and a complete 
collation and comparison of doctrinal sentiments. 
It brings out root ideas of man's condition in sin, 
God in Christ Jesus reconciling the w^orld to him- 
self, the sacrifice of Christ ample in extent and 
power to bring all the world to eternal salvation, 



192 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR Y. 

and that there is given to all men such freedom of 
will that they can be turned to Christ and obtain 
salvation, or they can, by the will, reject all offers 
of life and mercy, and be eternally lost. It is no 
great wonder that the elder Hodge says of Wat- 
son's "Institutes:" "Excellent, and well worthy of 
its high repute among Methodists ;" or that Dr, 
J. W. Alexander says: "Turretin is in theology 
' instar omnium ;' that is, so far as Blackstone is in 
law, making due allowance for difference in age. 
Watson, the Methodist, is the only systematizer 
within my knowledge who approaches the same em- 
inence, of whom in Addison's words, 'He reasons 
like Paley and descants like Hall.' " 

William Burt Pope, A. M., theological tutor in 
Didsbury College, Manchester, England, has pro- 
duced a second great work on Systematic Theology, 
based on Arminianism. It is a compendium of 
"Christian Theology," and consists of "Analytical 
Outlines of a Course of Theological Study, Biblical 
Dogmatic, and Historical." His treatment of sin, 
original and actual, of the mediatorial ministry, or 
providing an universal redemption, and the adminis- 
tration of redemption, is fully and masterfully done. 
Of the universality of redemption he writes : " The 
price was paid down for all men for the entire 
race, or for the entire nature of man in all its rep- 
resentatives from the first transgressor to the last. 
Redemption as such is universal" (which forms the 
basis of a particular application). "The media- 



SCHOLARS OF A RMINIA NISM. 193 

torial government of the world from the beginning 
has been a fruit and a proof of one great deliver- 
ance." "The Scripture speaks only of one grand 
redemption ; but it distinguishes, speaking of Him, 
who is the Savior of all men, specially of those 
that believe. Here the special is other than the 
general redemption, though springing from it; 
what makes it special is not the decree of sover- 
eignty, but the faith of those who embrace it. . . . 
Hence, as there is no deliverance which is not in- 
dividual, and no salvation which is not deliverance, 
the whole history of personal religion is exhibited 
in terms of Redemption : it is the release of the 
will, which is the universal benefit, the repentance 
which is bestowed by the Spirit of bondage, the 
release from the law of death in justification and 
regeneration, the redeeming from all iniquity in en- 
tire sanctification, the final expected redemption of 
the groaning creature, and the deliverance of the 
saints from the present evil world." (Pope, Vol. H, 
pp. 296-297.) 

Dr. Adam Clarke may be recognized as the 
great Wesleyan Methodist divine, antiquarian, Ori- 
entalist, and commentator. As a theologian, he 
was Arminian excepting in regard to the eternal 
Sonship of Christ. The commentaries that came 
from his fertile pen on the lines of original sin, 
the atonement for sin by Christ, universal redemp- 
tion, and the freedom of the will, are grounded in 
the Biblical teaching and Arminian thought. 



194 A RMINIA NISM IN HIST OR Y. 

Dr. Clarke was born in Moybeg, about 1762. 
He was a strong boy in physical character, but was 
dull of mind, until, smarting under the sarcasms of 
school-fellows, he suddenly aroused from his mental 
lethargy, and at once began such a study as far 
outstripped all his fellows and placed him in the 
front rank of the world's greatest scholars. The 
Commentary of Dr. Clarke was the work of years, 
he being about thirty years in its composition. It at 
once became a standard- work, was extensively cir- 
culated, and held its place in the front rank for 
many years. Even now, although somewhat super- 
seded by later works, it is a standard for reference, 
and wields an influence far beyond the limits of 
Methodism. 

In America have appeared writers and theolo- 
gians holding and advocating the Arminian view as 
strongly as any in Europe. The work of Miner 
Raymond, D. D. , for a long time a professor in the 
Garrett Biblical Institute, will stand as a great au- 
thority in systematic theology. It is pre-eminently 
Arminian in its doctrine, and equally evangelistic. 
At no time has there been any adverse criticism of 
this work as to its Arminian character. 

But it is probable that D. D. Whedon, LL. D., 
for so long a time editor of the Methodist Quarterly 
Review, and a successful commentator upon the New 
Testament Scriptures, has added more largely to the 
occult matter of Arminianism and shown the in- 



SCHOLARS OF ARMINIANISM. 195 

consistency of Calvinistic theories, than any other 
man of the last half of the present century. Whe- 
don's "Freedom of the Will as a Basis of Human 
Responsibility and Divine Government" is a work 
of remarkable breadth of thought, acumen of re- 
search, and clear statement. It is a "substantial 
contribution to the most difficult of all psycholog- 
ical and moral problems, the reconciliation of the 
sense of capital responsibility with our intellectual 
conclusions regarding the nature of the choice." 
Dr. Whedon defines "will" to be that power of 
the soul by which it intentionally originates an 
act or state of being. Or, more precisely, will 
is the power of the soul by which it is the con- 
scious author of an intentional act. (Freedom of 
Will, p. 15.) In treating of the Calvinistic doc- 
trine of predestination, Dr. Whedon speaks of it as 
an " unnecessary hypothesis," and proceeds to con- 
struct the system of God's divine government after 
the Arminian hypothesis. 

Another strong controversial Arminian writer 
was Rev. Wilbur Fisk, D. D., President of Wes- 
leyan University. His work bore the title "Cal- 
vinistic Controversy : Embracing a Sermon on 
Predestination and Election." It was especially 
designed to show the fallacies of New England 
theology in particular, and predestination or election 
in general. Dr. Fisk aimed to show that " the Cal- 
vinistic predestination is, on any grounds of consist- 



196 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

ency, utterly irreconcilable with mental freedom." 
He spent considerable time on the changes in Cal- 
vinism in New England, and the '' indefiniteness of 
Calvinism" as a system. The "Metaphysical The- 
ory of Dr. Hopkins," which had for its leading 
dogma that "God was the efficient cause of all 
moral action, holy and unholy, and that holiness 
consisted in disinterested benevolence," was shown 
to be consistent with the question put to a person 
desirous of judging of the possession of a religious 
experience: "Are you willing to be damned?" If 
willing, it was a wholesome sign that the will was 
made to be in harmony with God ; but if not will- 
ing to be damned, he was yet in his sins. 

Dr. Fisk demonstrated the tendency of the hu- 
man mind to run into extremes, illustrating it by 
Calvinism, from which there was a revolt which 
found no one standing on the middle line in the 
exact place of truth, and went to the other extreme 
of New England Unitarianism and Universalism. 
The Church was startled when a posthumous book 
of a Calvinistic clergyman appeared, entitled "Cal- 
vinism Improved." " It was merely an extension of 
the doctrine of unconditional election and irresisti- 
ble grace to all, instead of a part. From the prem- 
ises the reasoning seemed fair, and the conclusions 
legitimate. This made many converts. And the 
idea of universal salvation, when once it is em- 
braced, can easily be molded into any shape, pro- 
vided its main feature is retained. It has finally 



SCHOLARS OF ARMINIANISM. 197 

pretty generally run into the semi-infidel sentiments 
of no atonement, no Divine Savior, no Holy Ghost, 
and no supernatural change of heart ; as well as no 
hell, no devil, no angry God." (Fisk's Calvinistic 
Controversy, p. 88.) 

Dr. Fisk unmasked the subtil ties of the *' New 
Divinity" of New England, which had been advo- 
cated by the theological professors of Yale College 
of his day. It had two pillars : 1. Sin is not a 
propagated property of the human soul, but con- 
sists wholly in moral exercise ; 2. Sin is not the 
necessary means of the greatest good. The results 
of such tenets are clearly to be seen. Point after 
point in the arguments of the Predestinarianist 
was taken up, and the opposite views of Arminian- 
ism were presented in the rich but terse style of 
Dr. Fisk. Calvinism was shown to be antagonized 
by Arminianism upon a thoroughly rational basis. 
The entire controversy was carried out in a mas- 
terly, learned, and Christian spirit. 

Having thus far traced the history of the growth 
and development of the system of Arminianism, it 
is not necessary to carry this particular thought fur- 
ther. We are led to certain conclusions which are 
inevitable from the facts which have been adduced. 

(1) Arminianism is not the product of late pe- 
riods in the nineteen centuries about past, but was 
a line of doctrine held and advocated by the apos- 
tles and the fathers of the early Church. The in- 
troduction of this system of theology by Koorn- 



198 ARMINIANISM IN SIHTORY. 

hert, Simon Episcopius, and others, was not an in- 
novation upon any of the systems which had been 
invented and promulgated, but was a return to the 
thought of the primitive Christians. 

(2) The advocacy of Arminianism, in its day, 
was looked upon as almost a crime, and those who 
have stood out in the front ranks of its advocacy 
have been often branded with holding doctrines 
diametrically opposed to the teaching of Jesus 
Christ — a statement that is not true ; for no class 
of men have ever been stronger and more rigid in 
their advocacy of the Holy Scriptures and prim- 
itive Christianity than these Arminians. 

(3) Upon the principles of Arminianism there 
can be constructed a systematic theology which 
shall be in perfect harmony with the teachings of 
Jesus Christ and the inspired apostles, and the con- 
sciousness of believing hearts under the influences 
and enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. 

(4) The work of those who have adopted the 
Arminian system of theology has not been to tear 
down or prevent the work of other systems, but 
has gone out to the low and wicked of the world, 
and has lifted up a redeemed humanity, and 
brought it into communion with the Divine Being, 
until it has been filled with the power of divine 
love, and been able to accomplish the greatest work 
in human elevation. It has moved forward steadily 
in the times and conditions of persecution, and has 
sought for but one thing; namely, the glory of God 



SCHOLARS OF AR3IINIANISM. 199 

and the salvation of men. During this time it has 
been exerting a powerful influence for good, upon 
the old Calvinian theology on the one hand, and 
the latitudinarianism of Pelagianism, Socinianism, 
and Universalism on the other hand, bringing the 
rigid more nearly to the line of the Scripture, and 
restraining the others from going far away into the 
darkness of sin. 



Chapter X. 

ARMINIANISM AND THE FRIENDS. 

Kevolt of the Friends from Predestination — George Fox — 
Led into a Study of Predestination — Meditation and 
Prayer — Searched the Scriptures — Worshiped much — 
Greatly persecuted — A Devout People — Barclay's De- 
nunciation of Predestination Unconditional — Nine Rea- 
sons against it — Barclay 'sX)octrine of Atonement Essen- 
tially Arminian — Barclay's Apology — King Charles 
II and Barclay's Apology — Thomas Evans — New State- 
ment of Doctrine made at Richmond, Indiana — Dele- 
gates from all the Friends' Societies in the World — The 
Creed of the Society of Friends is Arminian throughout. 

When a doctrine of so revolting a nature as 
that of unconditional predestination and reproba- 
tion is extensively advocated, and is thereby wide- 
spread over the world, it may be expected that 
sooner or later minds will revolt therefrom, and 
publicly dissent from the thralldom of such doc- 
trines, and seek for something better and more in 
harmony with the written Word of God. Armin- 
ianism was such a revolt. Strong and thoughtful 
minds could not read the Word and find the pre- 
destination doctrine in it. This revolt spread far 
and wide. It influenced many minds. It was 
not neccessary that all should take the exact form 
of Arminianism in order to be in a similar re- 
volt. There were several centers of revolt, from 
200 



ARMINIANISM AND THE FRIENDS. 201 

which issued lines of influence of greater or less 
degree. These moved many minds in Europe. It 
was not necessary that these centers should have 
any real or implied connection until after the doc- 
trines were well advanced, and the discussions so 
far advanced as to give promise that they could not 
be overturned. The testimony of history is that, 
in the early part of the seventeenth century, there 
were in different parts of Europe taught doctrines 
bearing a striking resemblance to those of Arminius 
and Episcopius. The doctrines of Calvinism had 
been widespread. They had been taught in all 
their repulsiveness. Men of broader and more lib- 
eral views revolted from such teaching, and searched 
out a better method of interpreting the Divine 
mind and ''decrees" than that pursued at Geneva. 
One of the prominent peoples in those later 
years, who, a little later than the day of James Ar- 
minius, arose and began the revolt from predestina- 
tionism and reprobation unconditionally, was the 
Friends, or Quakers. They had their origin in 
George Fox, born at Leicestershire, England, in 
1624, of pious parents, members of the Anglican 
Church. These godly parents taught him the ways 
of religion early in life, and he was religiously in- 
clined at an early age. In the consciousness that 
his relation to God needed to be intensified, at nine- 
teen years of age he was "led by a sense of duty 
to seek retirement from the world, and he spent 
much time in reading the Holy Scriptures, with 



202 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

meditation and prayer. In the year 1647 he began 
to appear as a preacher of the gospel, and he 
found many prepared to receive his messages of 
love, calling them away from a reliance upon all 
rites and ceremonies to the Word of divine grace, 
or Spirit of Christ, as the efficient cause of salva- 
tion," It was not long before there were converts 
to his doctrine, and the numbers attending upon 
his preaching were very large. These converts 
spent much time in divine worship, waiting in 
silence for the coming of God's Spirit into them 
with enlightenment. When the Spirit came, they 
prayed, praised, and preached as they felt, under 
the Spirit of God. 

From the first, George Fox preached that 
''whosoever would, might come to God by Jesus 
Christ, and be eternally saved." While he and his 
followers did not denounce or attack the doctrine of 
election and reprobation as held by the Keformed 
Church, they did, in the most emphatic manner, 
teach the freedom of the will and a full salvation 
for all men on the condition of repentance of sin 
and faith in Jesus Christ. So successful was Fox in 
advocating his liberal theories that, at his death in 
1690, there were at least 75,000 members of the 
body of Friends. They developed splendid talent. 
George Fox, William Penn, William Pennington, 
and Robert Barclay were men of no ordinary talent, 
and were brilliant expositors of the new doctrine. 

The Society of Friends has been greatly perse- 



ARMINIANISM AND THE FRIENDS. 203 

cuted at times, has suffered at the haads of ene- 
mies, governments, and schisms ; but it has held on 
its way in the strong advocacy of the doctrines 
early formulated, which encouraged sinners to 
venture fully on the merits of a crucified and 
risen Christ for salvation. They have never known 
that there was any difference in the mind of the 
Father toward human souls when he devised the 
plafi of redemption, or in the mind of Jesus when 
he became incarnate and perfected the atonement. 
They taught that Jesus died for all men. 

The character of the early Society of Friends 
as a devout people, and their antagonism to the 
predestination and reprobation of men uncondition- 
ally, is found in their writings. Robert Barclay 
recited the doctrines of Calvinism in such terms as 
evinced that he was fully conversant with them. 
He used the terms, ''eternal and immutable de- 
cree," "predestinated to eternal damnation the far 
greater part of mankind," "without any respect to 
their disobedience or sin," "for the demonstrating 
of the glory of its justice," etc., in precisely the same 
sense as the Genevan theologians used them. Bar- 
clay called this a "horrible and blasphemous doc- 
trine." He gave reasons: 1. " It is a novelty; for 
it was not known for the first four hundred years 
after Christ." 2. "It is highly injurious to God, 
because it makes him the author of sin." 3. "It 
makes God delight in the death of sinners." 4. It 
renders "Christ's mediation ineffectual." 5. "It 



204 A RMINIANISM IN HIS TOR Y. 

makes the preaching of the gospel a mere mock 
and illusion." 6. "It makes Christ's coming, and 
sacrifice a testimony of God's wrath to the world, 
and one of the greatest judgments," for it saves a 
very few of the race. 7. "It renders mankind 
in a far worse condition than the devils in hell." 
8. The preaching of Christ's gospel is an absurdity, 
for it "makes the Lord to send forth his servants 
with a lie in their mouth," commanding them to 
invite all men to come to him and be saved, when 
only a very few are called and can come. 9. It 
makes prayer for sinners of no avail, and places 
Paul in a foolish light before the world when he ex- 
horts Timothy, "that first of all, supplications, 
prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made 
for all men." Barclay, and all of his followers, 
started back with horror from the Calvinistic doc- 
trine of reprobation irrespective of condition. 

On the other hand, Mr. Barclay places the 
atonement by the sufferings and shedding of blood 
of Jesus Christ as the central doctrine of Chris- 
tianity, and out of it comes the other great doctrine 
so full of spiritual comfort, that, by this full atone- 
ment, salvation is made possible for all men. He 
cites many proofs, all of which are held by the 
Friends' Society unto this day. He shows : 1. That 
it is positively affirmed in the Scripture. 2. Christ 
doth not will that any should perish. 3. The doc- 
trine is abundantly confirmed by the Apostle John. 
4. Augustine said in commenting on the ninety-fifth 



ARMINIANISM AND THE FRIENDS. 205 

Psalm: **The blood of Christ is of so great worth 
that it is of no less value than the whole world." 
5. Others of the fathers of the Church uttered as 
strong languarge. 6. God, out of his infinite love, 
sent his Son, who tasted death for every man, Jew 
or Gentile, Turk or Scythian, Indian or barbarian, 
and made it possible for them to be saved. 7. God 
sends his Light and Seed to invite, call, exhort, and 
strive with every man in order to save him. 

Mr. Barclay proceeds to show that since ' ' God 
willeth no man to perish," he hath therefore 
"given to all grace sufficient for salvation." God 
offers to work this salvation during the day of every 
man's visitation, *'by giving to every man a meas- 
ure of saving, sufficient, and supernatural light and 
grace." In the Parable of the Sower, Christ tells 
'^that this saving Light and Seed, or a measure of 
it, is given to all." Byjthis Light and Seed " many 
have been and some may be saved, to whom the 
gospel hath never been outwardly preached, and 
who are utterly ignorant of the outward history of 
Christ." "If all men have received a loss from 
Adam which leads to condemnation, then all men 
have received a gift from Christ which leads to 
justification." 

The above selections from Barclay's "Apology 
for the True Christian Divinity," and many more 
that might be quoted, are conclusive evidence of the 
revolt in may of the English minds against the doc- 
trines of predestination and reprobation uncondi- 
14 



206 A RMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

tional, as taught by Calvin and Beza at Geneva. To 
Barclay there was an intolerable repugnance to 
them. While in Holland, and elsewhere on the 
Continent, was going on this debate between Armin- 
ians and Calvinists, in England Barclay and his fol- 
lowers were striking right and left against the doc- 
trines of Calvinism. The contest in England was 
not quite so turbulent as on the Continent, but it 
was as sharp and determined. Men of culture were 
on either side. The stores of Greek and Latin lit- 
erature were open, and poured out plentifully on 
either side. 

Barclay's Apology was sent to King Charles II 
in 1675, and was designed to set forth fully and 
truly the doctrines and polity of the Friends. The 
king was in error as to the nature, design, and 
conduct of this people. He had been led to look 
upon them as dangerous to his interests and the 
welfare of the English Commonwealth. Hence, it 
became Barclay to take the teachings of George 
Fox and the followers of this man of God, and 
clearly set forth the real doctrines and character of 
the Friends. As an Apology it was masterly. It 
then stood the test of criticism, and has so stood 
up to this date. 

If we follow the course of doctrinal teaching of 
the Friends, it will be found that they have main- 
tained the same belief under all changes. In the 
book by Thomas Evans, bearing the title ''A Con- 
cise Account of the Religious Society of Friends, 



ARMINIANISM AXD THE FRIENDS. 207 

CommoDly Called Quakers," and published by au- 
thority of the society, there is clearly stated the be- 
lief of the people regarding the extent of salvation 
provided by the death of Jesus Christ. "There- 
fore, Christ hath tasted death for every man ; not 
only for all kinds of men, as some vainly talk, but 
for every man of all kinds ; the benefit of whose 
offering is not only extended to those who have the 
distinct outward knowledge of his death and suffer- 
ings, as the same is declared in the Scriptures, but 
even unto those who are necessarily excluded from 
the benefit of this knowledge by some inevitable 
accident." (Page 93. Ed. published by Friends' 
Bookstore, 804 Arch Street, Philadelphia.) 

When the Society of Friends determined to 
formulate a new Creed, or " Declaration of some 
of the Fundamental Principles of Christian Truth," 
it was not to change any of the vital doctrines 
held for so many years, or to indicate that they 
were weary of or wavered in anything held by the 
fathers of their sect, but to state these great and 
fundamental truths in the language of this day. 

The Conference assembled in Richmond, Indi- 
ana, the ninth month 23, 1887. It was formed 
of delegates from all the yearly meetings of the 
world. They were among the strongest and most 
thoughtful men of the entire society. They were 
scholarly and learned in doctrine. Many were 
giants in debate, as the stenographic report evi- 
dences. They came to the work of reviewing the 



208 



ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 



doctrines and usages of the Friends with a clear in- 
sight into the motives leading thereto, and as clear 
a comprehension of what effects would flow from a 
restatement of their doctrines, and the dangers at- 
tending the same. After determining that it was 
desirable that " all yearly meetings of Friends in 
the world should adopt one declaration of Chris- 
tian faith," they took up the old statements of Fox, 
Penn, Barclay, and others, and held them in the 
light of all the Calvinistic, Pelagian, Socinian, and 
skeptical discussions and controversies from 1647 to 
1887, and after carefully, thoughtfully, and prayer- 
fully examining them with the light of two hundred 
and forty years shed upon them, they adopted the 
same formularies, only changing the verbiage so as 
to conform with the style of language of to-day. 
Unchanged stands their doctrine of a universal sal- 
vation provided for all men, and enjoyed by every 
man w^ho, by repentance and faith, comes to Jesus 
Christ. They are Arminian throughout. No un- 
certain sound is given regarding original sin, free- 
dom of the will, or the sufficiency of grace. Who- 
soever Avill, may come to Jesus Christ and be saved. 
By this declaration of faith they demonstrated to 
the world that they are satisfied with the doctrines 
of the Fathers, they have no apologies to make for 
preaching a salvation provided for all men, they 
have not been disturbed by controversies or changed 
by every wind of doctrine, but steadily hold on to 
the old faith, and recognize the old landmarks. 



Chapter XI. 

ARMINIANISM AND REVIVALS. 

Armiuiauism in Contact with Sin and Sinners — A Kevival 
and Evangelizing Doctrine — A System that can be 
preached in all its Fullness— Characters of a Good Re- 
vival — A Revival and its Two Parts— Elements of a Re- 
vival — Consciousness of a Need of Re^^val — Active 
Effort — Presence and Co-operation of the Holy Spirit — 
A Free and Full Provision — Consistent Lives of those pro- 
moting a Revival— People must be awakened — The 
Slumbering Consciences of Sinners must be aroused — 
Easier to reach Sinners in a Revival than at other Times — 
Arminianism in a Revival — Does not need to drop any 
of her Doctrines— Need not repress any Emotion — In- 
stance of Repressed Emotion and the Ending of a Re- 
vival — Arminianism enforces her Doctrine with a Single 
Purpose — Arminianism can commence her Revival at 
any Point in the Round of Doctrine — All Revivals must 
be carried on under the Teaching of a Free Salvation — 
It is not Possible to have a Successful Revival and 
preach the Doctrines of Predestination — President 
Charles G. Finney — D. L. Moody — A Presbyterian Re- 
vivalist. 

The friends and advocates of Arminianism 
claim that it is a strong power, a living force, 
adapted to meet the wants of the hungry, sin-sick 
souls of dying men, and bring them into life and 
happiness. It is the great revival form of doctrine, 
free from all objectionable elements, and which 
takes hold of sinners, and, by the Holy Spirit's 

209 



210 A R MINI A NISM IN HIS TORY. 

power, leads to true enlightenment and assurance of 
salvation. It has this power because of inherent 
characters. It produces no revolt from itself, 
though it leads to revolt from sin. It is a natural, 
consistent, harmonious, symmetrical, and easily-un- 
derstood presentation to the mind of the sinner of 
his natural state, ''dead in trespasses and sin," and 
shows how he may turn to the Son of God, who 
died on the cross for the possible salvation of the 
sinner, and become certain that, having godly sor- 
row^ and confession of sin to God, he may by faith 
appropriate the merit of Christ's sacrifice to him- 
self, and his sins be fully and freely pardoned. It 
satisfies the seeker after light and pardon as no 
other system. It discovers the ennobling elements 
in God's scheme of salvation. 

The revival of religion has two parts to its 
meaning: 1. It refers to a renewal of interest in 
the matters of religion on the part of persons who 
already know of and enjoy a degree of light and 
knowledge. 2. It refers to the awakening of sin- 
ners to a consciousness of their lost estate in sin, 
and their earnest inquiry for the way of light and 
pardon, and their entrance into that state of blessed 
enjoyment and assurance. AVhenever there is a 
rousing of the Church from spiritual slumber and 
the quickening of the life of believers by the Holy 
Ghost, there is a corresponding awakening and con- 
version of sinners. 

There are certain well-defined elements that must 



A EM INI A NI8M A ND RE VI VAL8. 211 

enter into a genuine revival, and without which 
there can be no permanent reform. 

1. There must be among those connected with 
a revival movement a consciousness that all men 
are by nature sinners, that the bite of the serpent 
has infected all mankind with a tainted nature, and 
that those who are not now renewed by Diviue grace 
and pardoned are actual sinners. Until there is 
the deep consciousness of sin, and a corresponding 
realization of the sinfulness of sin, there will be 
but little or no turning to (xod. 

2. There must be an active effort of the renewed 
souls to urge upon the unrenewed the importance of 
turning to God through Jesus Christ for pardon 
and renewal. By this activity of already renewed 
souls there Avill be a sensible influence exerted upon 
the souls of the unrenewed to lead them to serious 
consideration of their state. By this individual 
influence minds destitute of God's favor are led to 
solemn thought, a consideration of the importance 
of the soul's salvation, and the danger of delay. 
A revival never takes on its best and strongest 
character until there is this individual effort. 

3. There needs to be the presence and co-opera- 
tion of the Holy Spirit, which Jesus promised to 
the Apostolic Church, and through them to all ages 
of the C'hurch, to go with them and convict of sin 
and a judgment to come, and re-enforce human 
agencies. The Holy Spirit goes before the human 
word in preaching, exhortation, warning, or counsel, 



21^ A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TORT, 

and then it follows with its silent but all-powerful 
influence. 

4. There must be^the preaching to, and teaching 
of, sinners that Jesus Christ has made a full atone- 
ment for the sins of our first parents, and for all 
sins of all generations of men. The sinner must be 
made to feel that the atonement has been made for 
him in person. He must look upon it as an indi- 
vidual and not a collective atonement. God does 
not save men in masses but singly. There is a 
universal atonement, and not a limited one. It 
must be made possible for all the world to be saved 
through the blood of Jesus, and not one in ten. 
This is one of the most important things connected 
with a great revival. Men must be led to feel a 
personal necessity, and that for all men there is a 
personal opportunity. As long as men have a fear 
that it is not possible for them to be saved, because 
God has failed to make provision for them, they 
will not be inclined to seek Christ and live. 

5. There must be consistent lives on the part of 
those who promote revivals, to back up the precepts 
taught and illustrate what Divine grace can do by 
what it has done. God will not work through de- 
filed agents. He will unmask the deceitful and 
unholy, who pretend to work for him, and show 
the hollowness of their lives. Even the sinners who 
want to turn to God and "seek salvation," detect 
the evil in human lives, and allow them to be stum- 
bling-blocks and hindrances to their salvation. 



ARMINIANISM AND REVIVALS. 213 

6. There must come into the hearts and minds 
of the community, and especially of those who are 
awakened, the consciousness that the revival is the 
work of God, and that men are only agents in the 
hands of God for accomplishing what he pur- 
poses. The work of God, as distinguished from the 
work of man, is really and truly of the highest char- 
acter. 

7. There must be an effort to rouse the slum- 
bering conscience of dying sinners, that they may 
see how dangerous their state without salvation, 
and how by delay they peril the highest interests of 
their immortal souls for all eternity. The means 
employed must be earnest prayer, wafted heaven- 
ward on wings of a strong faith ; holy song, full of 
awakening sentiments and convicting thought, sent 
forth with notes of sweetest cadence ; exhortations 
individually and in the congregation, breathing 
the fullness of redeeming love, w^ith human sym- 
pathy and affection ; preaching that sets forth strong 
doctrine in clear-cut words, terse sentences, and 
clearly understood thoughts, with aj^peals, warn- 
ings, entreaties and persuasions of the sinner to 
turn to Christ for pardon immediately. 

When a revival of religion is in full blast, and 
the hearts of believers are all alive to the impor-' 
tance of the work, and on fire with holy zeal, it 
does not seem nearly so hard for a soul to come to 
Jesus and be pardoned and renewed as when the 
Church is cold, the revival fires gone out, and extra 



214 ARMINIANIS3I IN HISTORY. 

services are closed. This is not strange, for God 
speaks of set times to favor Zion. The spirit of 
faith is stronger sometimes than at others. The 
atmosphere is sometimes surcharged with feeling, 
emotion, and concern. The spirit of consecration is 
more general in the Church. Seize these times of 
extraordinary feeling for the salvation of souls, and 
multitudes may find pardon, and experience redeem- 
ing love. 

How does Arminianism enter such a revival 
condition and time ? What advantages has Armin- 
ianism over other sys^tems of belief in a revival? 
These questions are answered quite readily : 

1. Arminianism does not need to drop any of 
her doctrines regarding God in his relation to man ; 
or reo:ardino; man in relation to God or his fellows; 
or regarding man's necessity for salvation, or the 
possibility of salvation being provided for all men ; 
or regarding the instantaneous and conscious knowl- 
edge of sins forgiven ; or regarding justification, 
regeneration, and entire sanctification. Arminian- 
ism holds all of these in their Biblical, natural, and 
logical order, and perfectly in harmony with the 
conditions under which man is found to exist. Ar- 
minianism does not need to repress any of the 
emotions of the sinner when his sorrow crushes him 
to the earth and pictures before him the awful re- 
alities of damned spirits, nor hold him back when 
the light of love and the voice of pardon enters 
the soul, and he rises a new creature in Jesus 



ARMINIANISM AND REVIVALS. 215 

Christ, and forcibly says: "Hallelujah! I'm 
saved; my sins are all forgiven ; I'm free !" With 
that rejoicing soul, just born into the kingdom, Ar- 
minianism rejoices also, and praises God in ecsta- 
sies of the redemption. 

We know of a little Methodist church in a college 
town of another church. A revival was in pro- 
gress in the church. Some citizens were con- 
verted, and some students attending the college 
were attracted to the meetings, and, becoming 
awakened, found pardon at the Methodist altar. 
The work spread, and two or three meetings were 
held in the college chapel, which was used as a 
church for that denomination. God's presence was 
felt, and one or two persons became greatly blessed. 
One of these arose and began to tell of his experi- 
ence, and praised God for what he had done in his 
soul, and, in so doing, raised his voice above what 
was esteemed the keynote of propriety. The ven- 
erable college president arose, shaking his cane over 
his head, and cried out: "None of that; none of 
that here. We will not have fox-fire in this 
place." The Spirit was quenched. The anxiety 
among his students subsided. It was over twenty- 
live years before another revival visited that college 
and its church. It did not again occur until one of 
the wild Juniors of the college came to the Meth- 
odist Church, which had steadily grown during 
these years, and was converted, and, through the 
burning zeal of his first love, tlie firebrand of re- 



216 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. 

vival was carried to the college, and a glorious blaze 
of light began to burst forth. 

2. Arminianism has a peculiar advantage in 
that she preaches and enforces the single doctrine 
that all men are sinners, but Christ Jesus died to 
make an atonement for the sins of all the world, so 
that it is possible for all to be saved. Somehow 
the human heart delights in the thought that it is 
not left out of the promise. "For me, Christ 
died," he says, and repeats with a fervor born of 
deep desire: '"For me the Savior died." Of all 
conditions the most undesirable is to go to a sorrow- 
ing and sobbing sinner, and tell him that we can't 
be certain that it is possible for him to be saved. 
He may be passed by. He may be reprobated, a 
predamned lost one. In all the history of the Chris- 
tian Church, Arminianism has never been forced to 
utter, either directly or indirectly, or impliedly, such 
a sentence of despair. But hope, blessed hope, is 
held out to the sinner. " Christ died to save you" 
rings out in glad refrain, and touches his ears, 
and soon reverberates through his whole soul, and 
he lives. 

3. Arminianism is able to commence her revival- 
work at any point of doctrine. One revivalist com- 
mences at the doctrine of depravity, and leads up 
to an atonement in Jesus Christ, and rousing re- 
vivals attend his labors. Another commences with 
the new life in the Church, and seeks to bring its 
members to their knees in a consecration of all 



ARMINIANISM AND REVIVALS. 217 

to God, and preparation for work. He seeks to re- 
ceive a Pentecostal shower. Then he leads his 
forces against the ranks of the Avicked, and hundreds 
fall under the word of preaching, exhortation, per- 
sonal appeal, singing the songs of Zion, and fervent 
prayer, and are happily converted and brought into 
Christ's fold. Another starts in at the point of 
entire sanctificatiou, and follows this with all the 
persistency of a conscientious man of God, and 
not only are hundreds of believers sanctified, but 
as many sinners are justified. Arminians may 
start from any point in their doctrines, and go out 
with revival power, and always reach the same 
results — a gracious revival and many souls con- 
verted. • 

Arminianism is the only successful revival doc- 
trinal system. The following proposition is readily 
maintained : In all cases of a revival in the Church, 
where success attends, Calvinists are comjDelled to 
surrender for the time being their Calvinistic doc- 
trines of predestination and reprobation, and preach 
and teach practically Arminianism, or the provision 
of salvation for all men. If they commence to 
preach that a certain portion of the race are pre- 
destinated to salvation, and the remainder are rep- 
robated to eternal loss in perdition, the inquiry im- 
mediately arises in the sinner's mind, ''To which 
class do I belong?" Since it is impossible to tell, 
according to that theory or system of theology to 
which he belongs, discouragement fills the mind, 



218 A H MINI A NIS3I IN HIS TOR T. 

and dark forebodiags and dread uncertainty fill the 
soul. 

Let us refer to examples to substantiate this 
position : 

1. President Charles G. Finney, of Oberlin, 
Ohio, became one of the most prominent and suc- 
cessful revivalists of the Congregational Church. He 
published a book of "Lectures on Revivals of Re- 
ligion," which may be read by the young or old 
minister with great profit. So far as I can find, 
from beginning to end, he lays aside all thoughts or 
expressions of predestination, and preaches, lectures 
and teaches — not in so many words, but actually — 
the soundest doctrines of Arminianism that man 
ever heard. This is true of his sermons on *' Pre- 
vailing Prayer," "The Prayer of Faith," "Means 
to be Used with Sinners," and "How to Preach 
the Gospel." In his sermon on " How to Preach 
the Gospel," Dr. Finney very clearly teaches that 
in a revival the doctrines of predestination can not 
be preached. "The gospel should be preached in 
those proportions," says Finney, " that the whole 
gospel may be brought before the minds of the 
people, and produce its proper influence. If too 
much stress is laid on one class of truths, the Chris- 
tian character will not have its due proportions. 
Its symmetry will not be perfect. If that class of 
truths be almost exclusively dwelt upon that re- 
quires great exertion of intellect, without being 
brought home to the heart and conscience, it will 



A RMINIA NISM A XD REVIVALS. 219 

be found that the Church will be indoctrinated in 
those views, will have their heads filled with no- 
tions, but will not be awake and active and efficient 
in the promotion of religion. . . . When I 
entered the ministry, there had been so much said 
about the doctrine of election and sovereignty, that 
I found it was the universal hiding-place, both of 
sinners and of the Church, that they could not do 
anything, or could not obey the gospel. xlnd 
wherever I went, I found it indispensable to de- 
molish these refuges of lies. And a revival would 
in no way be produced or carried on, but by dwell- 
ing on tliat class of truths which hold up man's 
ability, and obligation, and responsibility. This 
was the only class of truths that would bring sin- 
ners to submission." (Finney's Lectures, p. 188.) 

2. Mr. Dwight L. Moody has been before the 
Christian world for years as a revivalist. Having 
heard him in the midst of his meetings, we have 
never once heard him preach any other than the 
most perfect Arminianism regarding man's ability 
to be saved, and the universality of the provis- 
ion of atonement. Nor do his books reveal in any 
sense the predestination doctrine, but the ability 
of every sinner to come to God through the merits 
of Jesus Christ, and receive pardon by the gift of 
the Spirit of God. His preaching of this full and 
free gospel has shaken the sandy foundations of 
thousands of sinners. 

3. It was our privilege to attend some of the 



220 ARMINIANISM IN HISTOR Y. 

meetings of a prominent Presbyterian revivalist in 
a Presbyterian Church, and hear his sermons. He 
was an eloquent preacher, a true expositor of the 
Bible, earnest in presenting the truth, and successful 
in entreating sinners to turn from their sins and ac- 
cept Christ, and be saved. He never once spoke 
of divine sovereignty, and the decrees of God, the 
effectual call or predestination, but he constantly en- 
forced the declaration that all men are sinners, 
Christ Jesus died to save sinners, and whosoever 
will may come to the water of life freely, and par- 
take to their soul's salvation. He preached to 
dying men a free and full gospel to all men. 

In closing this sketch of i\.rminianism in History, 
it is just to say that it has been prepared in the 
spirit of kindly inquiry, backed by a desire to 
know of the great Arminian controversy, and its 
struggle to bring again into active exercise the doc- 
trines that prevailed in the early Church to near 
the end of the fifth century. This is far from 
being an exhaustive work. It is, however, a con- 
nected and true account of one of the world's 
greatest theological controversies. May it do good! 



APPENDIX. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARMINIUS, ARMINIANISM, 

AND WRITINGS FOR, AGAINST, AND 

EXPLANATORY THEREOF. 

The Works of James Arminius, D. D., translated 
from the Latin, in three volames, by James Nicols and 
Rev. W. R. Baguall, A. M., 1853. This work presents 
"all the theological works of Arminius, the publication 
of which was ever sanctioned by himself or friends." 
The first voluu)e contains his five masterly orations on 
great theological questions; namely, "The Priesthood of 
Christ," "The Object of Theology," "The Author and the 
End of Theology," The Certainty of Sacred Theology," 
and "On Reconciling Religious Dissensions among 
Christians." Here is found Arminius's "Declaration of 
Sentiments," "Apology against Thirty-one Defamatory 
Articles," and nine questions exhibited for the purpose 
of obtaining an answer fr }m each of the professors of 
Divinity, and the replies which James Arminius gave to 
them. 

The second volume contains seventy-nine private 
disputations, a dissertation on the true and genuine sense 
of the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, a 
letter to Hippolytus a Collibus on thirty- nine other ar- 
ticles of lesser importance. 

The third volume contains an epistolary discussion 
concerning predestination, between James Arminius, 
D. D., and Francis Junius, D. D., examination of a trea- 
tise concerning the order and mode of predestination 
and the amplitude of Divine grace, by William Perkins, 

15 221 



222 APPENDIX. 

a theological writer of England, and an analysis of the 
ninth chapter of Romans. 

In the Footsteps of Arminius, a Monograph, by Rev. 
William F. Warren, D. D., LL. D., President of Boston 
University ; pp. 52. Excellent so far as it goes. 

History of the Reformation of Gerhardt Brandt, 
translated into English by Chamberlayer; London, 1720 ; 
four volumes. 

Arminianism : Article in McClintock and Strong's 
Cyclopedia. An excellent and strong article. Also ar- 
ticles in the Encyclopsedia Britannica and Schaff's 
edition of Herzog. These articles are only satisfactory 
as an outline of the life and labors of Arminius and 
of the doctrines taught. In general they are quite fair 
in stating the present thought as to Arminianism in the 
Methodist Churches, but do not give any vieM' as to 
what Arminianism has done for other Churches and 
beliefs. The student will find it very necessary to make 
a careful search elsewhere to find the real influence of 
the doctrines of xlrmiiiianism. 

Memoirs of Simon Episcopius, the celel^rated pupil 
of Arminius, by Frederick Calder; pp. 478. This is a su- 
perior work, and clearly jDortrays the struggle of Ar- 
minianism in the Synod of Dort. The work was pub- 
lished by Mason and Lane, New York Methodist Book 
Concern, in 1837. It is the best work now within the 
reach of students on this interesting subject. In this 
work there is a clear account of the character of the 
gentle Arminius, of the scholarly Uytenbogaert, the cul- 
tivated Hugo Grotius, and of the great statesman Barne- 
veldt. Here is an epitome of the sentiments of Go- 
marus and Arminius, as they confronted each other. It 
contains the Constitution of the Dutch Church, Epis- 
copius's Oration in the University of Leyden, the chal- 



APPENDIX. 228 

lenge to the members of the Synod of Dort to debate 
on the questions of predestination, the Five Articles of 
Arminianism that controvert the Five Points of Cal- 
vinism, Barne veldt and his relation to Arminianism, to- 
gether with other equally important matters. 

Arminius : Article by Dr. AVm. F. Warren, in the 
Methodist Quarterly Review of July, 1857. This is an 
excellent and thoughtful production, and carefully 
weighs the character of Arminianism, and compares it 
with the Calvinism of the times. 

Hagenbach's Histoky of Doctrines, translated by 
Dr. Smith, in Sections 225-235, gives a fair statement con- 
cerning Arminianism. 

Alzog's Universal Church History (Roman Cath- 
olic), Vol. Ill, pp. 326-330, has a few pages regarding the 
controversies in Reformed and Lutheran Churches, in 
which he gives only a part of the great struggle between 
Arminianism and Calvinism. The article furnishes 
food for thought. It is profitable to know what a party 
antagonistic to both Arminianism and Calvinism thinks 
of the controversy. 

Symbolism, by J. A. Moehler, D. D.; translated from 
the German by James Burton Robertson. Two volumes 
of the London edition are put in one of the American 
edition, pp. 496-505. Dr. Moehler was a Roman Cath- 
olic writer, and at times was not inclined to give full 
credit to what he chose to call the sects. Upon the 
Avhole, what he says is worthy of consideration. He 
speaks wholly of the doctrines of Arminius as held 
by the Methodists, and the " religious state of England 
at the beginning of the eighteenth century." 

Compendium of Christian Theology, by Pope. This 
able English Methodist Avork on Systematic Theology is 



224 APPENDIX. 

a monument of excellence and industry. It devotes 
many pages of the first and second volumes to a discus- 
sion of Arminianism and Arminius. He makes very 
judicious comparisons of the Arminianism of Method- 
ism of the close of the nineteenth century with the Ar- 
minianism of the beginning of the seventeenth century. 
Dr. Pope shows the shades of difference between Ar- 
minius and Hugo Grotius. The nice distinctions are 
preserved between the various doctois of the Arminian 
faith and of the Roman and Presbyterian teachers. 

Fletcher's Checks to Antinomianism. These books, 
four volumes, are the work of Rev. John Fletcher, 
Vicar of Madeley, one of Mr. Wesley's most valued fol- 
lowers. He had a well-disciplined mind, an acute dis- 
cernment between Scripture truth and the theories of 
men, a ready formulation of his thoughts into sentences 
that were made to mean just what he intended them to 
mean. Mr. Fletcher's writings are standards in the 
Methodist Churches throughout the world. The pas- 
sages especially devoted to James Arminius and Armin- 
ianism are numerous, and are best found by the General 
Index, placed in the fourth volume. Fletcher gives an 
excellent reason why Arminianism became so popular in 
the reigns of King James and Charles I, in England. 

Theological Institutes, by Richard Watson, two 
volumes, is a systematic theology co structed upon the 
Arminian doctrine as its basis. Richard Watson was a 
follower of Mr. Wesley, of a cultured mind, a clear per- 
ception of truth, a profound devotion to God, and com- 
petent fully to discuss the most abtruse propositions. 
He was a carefnl and accurate studer-t of theology, was 
calm in manner, of extensive reading, and great devo- 
tion to what he conceived to be the truth. The Insti- 
tutes have for years been a standard of Methodiht doc- 



APPENDIX. 225 

trine, and have been put into the hands of the young 
preachers as a text-book on doctrines. 

The Life of James Arminius D. D., written in Latin 
by Casper Brandt, Remonstrant minister, Amsterdam, 
and translated by John Guthrie, A. M., is a valuable 
contribution to the history of Arminianism. It was 
published by the Book Concern of the Methodist Epis- 
copal Church, South. The introduction to this work by 
Dr. Thomas 0. Summers is an excellent balancing of the 
character of Arminius, the pure doctrines of Arminian- 
ism, and the " Semi-Pelagianism in the Church of Eng- 
land, and Semi-Socinianism in the Churches of New 
England." 

ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS. 

Arminian Doctrine of Self-determination. S. C. 
Bruce. Theological Review, Vol. V, p. 371. 

Arminian View of the Fall and Redemption. D. D. 
Whedon. Methodist Quarterly Review, Vol. XXI, p. 647. 

Arminianism and Calvinism. Christian Observer. 
Vol. I, p. 787. 

Arminianism and Grace. J. C. Rankin. Princeton 
Review, Vol. XXVIII, p. 38. 

Princeton Review on Arminianism. Methodist 
Quarterly Review, Vol. XVI, p. 257. 

Controversy on Arminianism in the Low Countries. 
Methodist Quarterly Review, Vol. IV, pp. 425-556. 

Difficulties of Arminianism. S. Comfort. Ameri- 
can Methodist Magazine, Vol. XXI, p. 319. 

Historic Arminianism. Boston Review, Vol. I, 
p. 287. 



226 APPENDIX. 

Inconsistencies and Erroks of Arminianism. South- 
ern Keview, New Series, Vol. XXII, p. 464. 

James Arminius. W. F. Warren. Methodist Review, 
Vol. XVII, p. 345. 

Arminius and Akminians in Holland. Methodist 
Magazine, Vol. XXXVI, p. 23. 

Arminius and Arminianism. Christian Examiner, 
Vol. LXVIII, p. 393. 



INDEX. 



Arminianism, at Synod of Dort, 8 ; preached on Boston 
Common, 9; taught freedom of the will, 11; de- 
fined, 11 ; erroneous statements concerning, 13 ; 
Third Proposition, 111; Fourth Proposition, 113; 
Fifth Proposition, 114 ; not killed at Synod of Dort, 
129 ; in England, 131 ; in its Wesleyan growth, 156 ; 
of the Friends, 200 ; in revivals, 209 ; drops no doc- 
trine in a revival, 214 ; Five Articles, 65, 68. 

Angelica, mother of Arminius, 15. 

Augustine and Augustinism, 8, 13, 95, 97. 

^Emilius, 15 ; death, 16. 

Arminius, James, born, 15 ; father and mother, 15 ; their 
death, 15; adopted by yEmilius, 15; adopted by 
Snellius, 16; at Marburg, 16; journey to Oudewater, 
16 ; walk to Marburg, 16 ; at Rotterdam with Peter 
Bertius, 17 ; at University of Leyden, 17 ; teachers, 
17; adopted by the merchants of Amsterdam, 17; 
at Geneva, 18; pupil of Beza, 18; met Uytenbogaert, 
18 ; lecturing at Geneva, 19 ; attacked Aristotle, 19 ; 
at Basle, 19; declined the doctorate, 19; return to 
Geneva, 19; at Padua, 19; at Rome, 20; called to 
Amsterdam, 20; denied having favored Rome, 20; 
ordained, 20; style of preaching, 21 ; how affected 
by his visit to Rome, 21 ; how he came to antagonize 
Calvinism, 22; employed to controvert Koornhert's 
book, 24 ; effect upon himself, 24 ; lecture on Romans 
ix, 25 ; effect of his sermons, 25 ; mental and spirit- 
ual exercises, 25 ; marriage to Elizabeth Real, 25 ; 
mode of interpreting " For we know that the law is 
spiritual," 26 ; various false charges against him, 27 ; 

227 



228 INDEX. 

before the ministers of Amsterdam, 28 ; Peter Plau- 
cius against him, 28 ; Arminius's defense, 29 ; cleared, 
29; Lydius and Uytenbogaert attempt harmony, 29; 
senators of Amsterdam hear Arminius, 29; Brandt's 
account, 30; vindicated, and free to preach, 31; a 
professor at Leyden, 33 ; released at Amsterdam, 33; 
oppressed by Calvinist ministers, 33 ; calm amid the 
opposition, 35; made a doctor and invested with the 
office, 36 ; examination, 36 ; disputation, 36 ; his pur- 
pose as to his work, 37 ; three orations, 37 ; his ene- 
mies take advantage of his presence at a discussion, 
38; besieged with the question of predestination, 
39 ; falsely called a Pelagian, 39 ; his charge against 
Beza and Gomarus, 40 ; made rector of Leyden Uni- 
versity, 40 ; demonstrated belief in Providence, 42 ; 
ready for debate, 43; always advocated salvation free 
for all men, 43; lectures on Jonah and Malachi, 44; 
resigned the rectorship, 44 ; oration on religious dis- 
sension, 44; prompt compliance with the Gorcum 
Synod, 47; interpretations of the confession, 47; en- 
dured affliction, 48 ; visited Hippolytus, 49 ; drew up 
a statement of his doctrines, 49 ; reply to Borrius, 
49; declaration of sentiments, 49; death, 50; charac- 
ter, 50 ; motto, 50 ; words at The Hague, 103 ; reasons 
for opposing predestination, 103-109. 

Amsterdam, burgomeisters adopt Arminius, 18; they 
called Arminius from Geneva, 20 ; hear charges 
against Arminius, 29 ; decision of the senators, 31. 

Assembly of West Holland and Friesland voted against 
Arminianism, 70 ; SchaflP's remarks, 70. 

Alva, 53, 145; the butcher, 146; angry, 147; Alva's tax, 
148 ; threatened to hang eighteen men of Brussels, 
148 ; States ordered to assemble at The Hague, but 
meet at Dort, 149. 

Amyraut, 127 ; professor of Theology at Bourgueil, 127 ; 
difference between objective and subjective grace, 128. 



INDEX. 229 

Articles of religion of Church of England not Armin- 

ian, 131. 
Age of theological revolt, 136. 
Assembly of Holland and William unite, 150. 
Albinus, 152. 
Anne, the Queen, 157. 
Arminian Magazine, 165. 

Barneveldt, John, 34; Advocate-General of Holland, 
53; advocated Arminianism, 64; executed, 71. 

Borrius, Adrian, 49. 

Baxterianism, 114. 

Boerhave, 152. 

Barclay's Apology, 204; rejected Calvinism, 203; true 
Church Divinity, 205. 

Bertius, Peter, 36. 

Burgomeister Benning, favored Episcopius, 53. 

Bohler, Peter, 130. 

Baro, Peter, 132 ; professor at Cambridge, 132. 

Beggars of the Sea, 148. 

Brill, 149. 

Blois, William de, 149. 

Calvinism, dominant in Holland, 8; questioned the 

right of any to doubt, 9 ; Geneva, 9 ; Scotland, 9 ; 

England, 9; New England, 9; necessitated will, 11; 

modification in Calvinism, 101. 
Calvin, John, united Augustinism and Gottschalkisra, 

98; his Institutes, 13, 99; genius of Calvin, 101. 
College in Amsterdam, 83. 
Colhbus, 48. 
Copleston's words, 115. 
Cox, 136. 
Crucius, 36. 

Counter- remonstrants, 65. 
Curcelleeus, born, 75; entered the Genevese Stoa, 75; 

student of Beza, 75 ; letter of commendation from 



230 INDEX. 

Geneva, 76; travels, 76; ordained, 77; pastor at 
Fontainebleau, 77; revolt from Calvinism, 77; pas- 
tor at Amiens, 77 ; refused the Canons of Dort, 77 ; 
pastor at Verres, 78 ; at Amsterdam, 78 ; Poelenburg's 
estimate of Curcelleeus, 78 ; successor of Episconius as 
professor of Divinity at Amsterdam, 81 ; death, 
words of triumph, 82, 86. 

Charles V, 142 ; abdicated, 143. 

Campbell's Puritan in Holland, 143. 

Chartered cities, 145. 

Council of Troubles, 146. 

Council of Blood, 146. 

Court of St. Cloud, 146. 

Coligny slain, 150. 

Calvinistic Methodists in three sects, 175. 

Clarke, Dr. Adam, an Arminian writer, 193. 

Conclusions, 197. 

Charles II and Barclay's Apology, 206. 

Deputies of Holland arranging for a preliminary 

Synod, 48. 
Doctrines rejected by Arminius, 68, 69. 
Dutch Republic, 142. 
Drusus, 152. 

Episcopius, Simon, 52 ; professor of Theology at Ley den, 
52; his name Bisschop, 53; pupil of Beckemanus, 
54 ; adopted and educated by the Senate of Amster- 
dam, 54 ; placed in University of Leyden, 54 ; made 
Master of Arts, 54 ; Theological studies under Ar- 
minius, 54; preached before the Senate of Amster- 
dam, 54; called "The Dutch Cicero," 55; appointed 
court preacher, 55 ; relations with Barne veldt, 55 ; 
Institutes, 83; principles upon which he lectured, 
83, 86. 

England's condition as seen by Hallam, 134. 

Enelish divines favorable to Arminians, 137. 



INDEX. 231 

Elizabeth, 147. 

Evans, Thomas, account of the Friends' doctrine, 206. 

Elements of a revival, 211. 

Five Points and Five Articles, 64 ; laid before the As- 
sembly of Representatives, 64 ; written by Uyten- 
bogaert, 64. 

Fletcher's estimate of Bishop Laud, 134; Fletcher, 181; 
educated, 182; a soldier, 182; in England and with 
Methodist societies, 182; a priest, 182; rector, 182; 
Benson's description of him, 182 ; as a controversial- 
ist, 183 ; statement of Arminianism, 183; answer to 
Toplady, 184 ; statement as to how Arminianism es- 
teems grace and justice, 186; essays on Bible Calvin- 
ism and Bible Arminianism, 187; Fletcher's argu- 
ment, 188. 

Fisk's Calvinistic controversy, 195; unmasking the 
"New Divinity," 197. 

Fox, founder of the Friends, 201 ; an Arminian, 201. 

Friends, or Quakers, 201 ; their new creed, 207. 

Finney, Rev. Charles G., in a revival, 218. 

Grotius, Hugo, 50 ; scholarship, 53 ; birth, 60 ; at Uni- 
versity of Leyden, 60 ; his Latin poem to Henry IV 
of France, 60; visit to Paris, 60; a lawyer, 60; a lit- 
terateur, 60; pensioner of Rotterdam, 61 ; with Cas- 
aubon in England, 61; embraced Arminianism, 61 ; 
for toleration, 61; eloquent, 62; arrested, placed in 
Loewenstein, 62; wife helped him to escape, 63; 
fled to France, 63 ; died at Rostock, 63, 87. 

Godfrey, 76. 

Guilds of Netherlands, 144. 

Gerard, the assassin of William of Orange, 153. 

Gomarus, 33 ; oration in honor of Junius, 33 ; opposi- 
tion to Arminius, 34; examined Arminius, 36; un- 
civil towards Arminius, 38 ; seen by a committee at 
Leyden, 47. 



282 INDEX. 

Gonda, discussion, 45. 

Grevinchovius, 36. 

Gottschalk, 13, 97 ; his system, 98 ; theory of Gottschalk 

and Augustine united by Calvin, 98. 
Geneva school, 18. 
Gorcum Synod, 46, 47. 
Greek Fathers, effect when read in England, 137. 

Hume's statement of the Arminian controversy, 125. 

Hallam's estimate of England's Constitution, 134. 

Holland, 141 ; rising hope, 151. 

Haarlem and its butchery, 151. 

Howell Harris, 173. 

Huntingdon, Countess of, 174. 

Hodge's erroneous statements, 14 ; sermons, 92. 

Hominius, 36, 41. 

Helmichius, 39. 

Hoorn, 45. 

Halsberg, confident of Arminius, 47. 

Hippolytus a Collibus, 48 ; received Arminius, 49. 

Hagenbach's words, 86. 

Historical review of theological conditions, 94. 

Hoard, Samuel, rector of Moreton College, 133. 

" Ice Bird," 92. 

Junius, Francis, death, 32. 

Jesuits, free-will advocates, 126. 

Jansenists, predestination advocates, 126. 

Jewell, 138. 

James I of England, control of Synod of Dort, 136. 

KooRNHERT, EicHARD, 22 ; Secretary of State of Holland, 
23 ; his book, 23 ; whom he attacked, 24 ; Lydius ap- 
pointed to refute the book, 24. 

Kuchlinas, 39. 

Kurtz's misunderstanding of Arminianism, 179. 



INDEX. 233 

Luther, 74, 98 ; controversy with Erasmus changed his 
belief in predestination, 116. 

LeClerc, 84. 

Limborch, 84, 86; life and career, 120; student at 
Utrecht, 121; pastor at Gonda, 121; professor of 
Divinity, 121 ; Staudlein's estimate, 121 ; Divinity, 
123; a commentator, 122 ; Kitto's estimate, 122; his 
Theologia Christiana, 123; Book of Limborch's dis- 
tinction between Arminianism and Calvinism, 123. 

Lutherans tended to Arminianism, 128. 

Lydius, 29. 

Lansbergius, 39. 

Leyden University astir over Arminius, 41. 

Lambeth Articles, object, 137; Whitgift's approval, 137 ; 
Lord Burleigh's disapproval, 137. 

Louis of Nassau, 149 ; at Mons, 149. 

Leyden taken by Orange, 151; university founded, 152. 

Lipsius, 152. 

Leyden and Protestants from France, 152. 

Laud and Juxon, 133; Fletcher's estimate of Laud, 134. 

Low countries, 141. 

Medenblick, 45. 

Mosheim's remarks on Arminianism, 71. 

Melanchthon, 74, 98; his Loci Theologici, 110. 

Moravians, or Zinzendorfians, 129. 

Mennonites, 129 ; antedated Arminius, 130. 

Menno Simons, 130. 

Margaret of Parma, 145. 

Marck, William de la, at Brill, 149. 

Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day, 150. 

Middleburgh, victory at, 151. 

Moody, D. L., in a revival, 219. 

National Synod, question of, 44; demand for, 45; 
ordered, 45; work, 45; questions that aros^, 46; R:?- 
formed pastors opposed revision, 46 ; Arminius and 



234 INDEX. 

Uytenbogaert favored revision, 46; Synodical let- 
ters, 47. 

Neeranus and his wife, 88. 

Nitschmann, 130. 

Nowell, 138. 

Netherlands, 141. 

Nonjuring Presbyterians, 157. 

Original Sin, 12. 

Plaucius, 29. 

Pestilence in Holland, 32. 

Poelenburg's funeral oration, 78 ; a professor, 84. 

Persecutions at Leyden, 89. 

Persons making a cloak of Artninianism, 112. 

Pelagianism founded no societies, 95 ; contact with Ar- 
minianism, 113. 

Pelagius the Monk of Wales, 96 ; at Hippo, 97. 

Pope's statements, 96 ; Systematic Theology, 192. 

Predestinarianism leading to Pantheism, 100 ; predesti- 
nation, first form, 103-109; second form, 109. 

Pre-Wesleyan Arminianism of the Continent, 126. 

Play fere, John, 132; professor at Cambridge, 132; Bak- 
er's remarks about him, 132. 

Peter Paaw, 152. 

Puritanism strong in the Netherlands, 133. 

Protest of a Cameronian against Arminianism, 157. 

Political home of Arminianism, 139. 

Puritanism and Arminianism, 140; the two con- 
trasted, 140. 

Philip 11, 142; ruler of the Netherlands, 143; cruel, 145. 

Prince of Conde, 147. 

Penn and Pennington, 202. 

Ramus, 19. 

Remonstrants and Counter Remonstrants, 65. 

Revolt of Arminius and Episcopius, 74. 



INDEX. 235 

Remonstrants' College at Amsterdam, 83; professors, 84. 

Ryckewart, 88. 

Requesens, Louis de, in place of Alva, 151. 

Raymond's Systematic Theology, 194. 

Revivals and Arminianism, 209 ; a revival and its two 
parts, 210 ; elements of a revival, 211 ; revival in a 
college town, 215 ; Calvinists in a revival surrender 
their peculiar doctrine, 217. 

Synod of Dort, 8-12. 

Second class of Arminian writers, 73. 

Schleiermacher's views of Arminianism, 85. 

Synod of South Holland, 46. 

Socinus in Poland, 95. 

Sovereignty of God absolute, 100; unconditional, 100. 

Scholars of Arminianism, 179. 

Sublapsarianism, 111. 

Socinianism, 111, 112. 

Supralapsarianism, 114. 

Sacramental controversy, effect upon Arminianism, 128. 

Sandys, 136. 

States Assemblies and Alva's tax, 148. 

St. Bartholomew's Day, 150. 

Separation between Wesley and Whitefield, 167. 

Shirley, 174. 

Trelcatius, 47. 

The Hague, preliminary Synod, 48; Arminius presented 

a Declaration of Sentiments to the Synod of The 

Hague, 49. 
Treatment of banished preachers, 87. 
Theological revolt, age of, 136. 
Theological teaching when John Wesley came, 138. 
Title of London Church property, 167. 
Toplady, 175. 
Trevecca, 175. 



236 INDEX. 

Universalism, 10 ; no human will in salvation, 10. 

Unitas Fratrum, 129. 

United Netherlands, 142. 

TJytenbogaert, 19, 29 ; intercedes for Arminius, 33, 34 ; 
preacher at The Hague, and chaplain to Prince 
Maurice.' 52 ; defended Arminianism, 56 ; leader of 
the Eemonstrants, 56; born in Utrecht, 56; pastor 
at Utrecht, 56 ; personal appearance, 57 ; opposed 
compulsory support of symbols, 57 ; his demand of 
the State, 57; his influence, 57; the State invoked 
against him, 58; sought for toleration, 58; his col- 
loquy at The Hague, 58 ; president of the Synod of 
Wallevick, 59 ; arrested at Antwerp and banished to 
Rouen, 59; secret return, 59; part of his goods re- 
stored, 59; liberties curtailed, 59; death, 59; author 
of the Five Articles, 64. 

Utrecht refused Alva's tax, 148. 

Van Cattenburgh, 85. 

Van Oosterzee and Arminianism, 86. 

Voetius, Gysburtius, erroneous teachings, 124 ; a stu- 
dent at Leyden, 124; character, 124. 

Vorstius, Conrad, born, 125; educated, 125; professor 
at Steinfurt, 125; expelled by order of James I of 
England, 125. 

Van der Does, 152. 

Vossius, 152. 

Will, necessitated, 11; freedom of will, 11. 

Wettstein, 85. 

Writers, modern, regarding Arminianism, 85. 

Winer and Arminianism, 86. 

Warren, Dr. W. F., statement, 102. 

Words of Arminius, 103. 

Watson, an Arminian writer, 114; theology constructed 

on the Arminian basis, 189. 
Wesley and Arminianism, 119, 158. 



INDEX. 237 

William of Orange, 146 ; The Silent, 146 ; made Stadt- 
holder, 147 ; defeated, 147 ; fled to France, 147 ; be- 
lieved himself a man of destiny, 150; assassi- 
nated, 153. 

Wesleyan Arminianism a Reformation, 158. 

Wesley's letter to his mother, 159 ; his mother's reply, 
159 ; Mrs. Wesley's letter from Wroote, 160 ; sermon 
on " Free Grace," 161 ; eight reasons for antagoniz- 
ing predestination, 161-163; Wesley's Dialogue, 163; 
four reasons against predestination, 163-164; in 
the light, 164 ; a logician and organizer, 168 ; letter to 
Whitefield, 169, 172; letter of 1747 to Whitefield re- 
garding a union of Methodist societies, 176. 

Whitefield, a friend of Wesley, 167; an impulsive man, 
168; orator, 168; visit to America, 169; letter to 
Wesley, 169 ; second voyage to America, 170 ; letter 
from Savannah, 170; letter from Lope-n, 170; histor- 
ical fact, letter to Hutton, 171 ; imploring Wesley 
not to speak against election, 171 ; letters to Wesley 
from South Carolina, 172 ; letter from Boston, 172 ; 
return to England, 177 ; not well received in Scot- 
land, 177. 

Welsh Calvinistic Methodists, 174. 

Whedon and the Review, 194 ; freedom of the will on 
an Arminian basis, 195. 

Zakabella, 19 
Zwingli, 74, 99. 
Zinzendorf, 129. '^ 



-^j (^X^ ©\^ @x® @x^ @\# ®\p) @\© J^ 

^ 7jv7jx:7ix7|x7jx yixxjx^jx^^^ "j^ 



THE WITNESS OF THE WORLD TO CHRIST. 

By REV. W. A. MATHEWS, M. A. 

j2mo. Cloth. 240 pages, go cents. 

"We all, whether students of natural or revealed truth, 
are groping our onward way to perfect light, and whatso- 
ever doth make manifest aught that to either is yet dark, 
is light that we well may hail, even if its rays penetrate to 
us from without the chamber of our own special study." 

" This is a valuable and suggestive work by a minister of the 
Church of England. It is well adapted to meet some current forms 
of skepticism, and to strengthen faith in the divine character of the 
Christian religion. . . . He maintains that Christianity is not 
merely one of the religions of the world, but a new \\i&.^^— Christian 
Guardian. 



THE MASTER SOWER. 

By REV. F. S. DAVIS, A. M. 

j2ino. Cloth. ip6 pages, 75 cents. 

"The principles of the Christian religion are strikingly 
like principles of germation and growth in material nature. 
Christian truths germinate, grow, and multiply in a single 
soul, and in the souls of the human race en masse.^'' 

"An original, suggestive, and well-written hod^."— Northern 
Christian Advocate. 

"In this volume the author gives a natural, common-sense ex- 
position and practical application of the Parable of the Sower. . . . 
The book is well written, and will provide interesting and profitable 
reading for the candid and thoughtful." — Religious Telescope, 



HUNT & EATON, New York, Boston, Pittsburg, San Francisco. 



^ .-^^x X|X y|X .-^ix .-^jx y jx y jx .-/jx yjx ,-< jx .-^jx y jx xjx xjx yjx y jx x4xyjx*>j-^ 

VOX DEI: 

The Doctrine of the Spirit as it is set forth in the 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. 

By R. A. REDFORD, M. A., hh. D. 

/2??io. Cloth. 344 pages, $i oo 

*'The specific want of such an age as the present, when 
speculation is rife and opinions clash, while at the same 
time extraordinary activity is aroused; when, because we 
think and work at high pressure in all departments of 
human life, we are tempted to be superficial and too easily 
caught by novelty, — our greatest demand must be for 
materials wherewith to build up solid structures of faith." 

" The work before us is thoroughly Scriptural. Its appeal is to 
the Word of God, and it is needless to say that the conclusions 
reached are thoroughly orthodox. It is an excellent treatise on a vital 
subject, and should be widely r&a6..''—Pitisburg Christian Advocate, 



GENESIS I AND MODERN SCIENCE. 

By CHAS. B. WARING, Ph. D. 

i2mo. Cloth. 245 pages, ^^ $1 00 

"Can it be bettered? Nay, is it possible to make the 
slightest change in it without the most serious conse- 
quences to what we call science ? Instead of a blunder, 
there is here proof of the omniscience of the author of this 
account, the more marvelous because, until lately, it seemed 
just the opposite." 

" This is a vigorous and able vindication of the harmony existing 
between modern science and the account of the origin and early 
molding of the universe recorded in the first chapter of Genesis. The 
argument is presented in the guise of conversations on successive 
evenings between the author and an objecting "professor," who is the 
advocate of an irreconcilable disagreement between science and the 
Biblical account of creation."— t/. B. Quarterly Review. 



CRANSTON & CURTS, Cincinnati, Chicago, St. Louis. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIOI 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 



fr 



